Welcome to the politics, guys. I'm Michael Baranowski, a political scientist at Northern Kentucky University.

Hey, Jay, you know, it's been a while since we have done a listener mail show, but that's what we're doing today.

So we've got a bunch of listener questions all queued up and ready to go.

So are you ready?

I'm ready.

All right, let's do it. We'll start with an

email from John, who writes in part, how about exploring military expenditures, comparing and

contrasting the view that we need a larger, say, Navy with those asking for a focus on better

body armor or preparing for a traditional war versus more of a series of

smaller conflicts. I want to learn what the evidence-based perspectives are from center right to

center left. My personal perspective is that every dollar spent on a gun is one not spent on our

most vulnerable citizens. But I have intelligent fact-driven friends whose values I largely respect who help me understand

that there are a lot of gray areas in the military expenditures question that I would love

hearing explored, not just to spend or not, but how to spend or where to spend operationally.

So, Jay, well, what are your thoughts on that, military spending,

how we should spend it, where we should spend it, or, you know, if we're spending too much of it?

Well, I'd say, you know, for the conservative answer, are we spending too much? Probably always

in that, you know, do we get the best deal on things or things overpriced? There was, you know, always there's been that history of, you know, do we get the best deal on things or things overpriced?

There was, you know, always, there's been that history of our military contracts overpriced.

And I think that's, that's part of just part of the beast that you deal with.

In large part, I would say, yeah, I think our military has become the more mobile, lighter sort of

force that it needs to be. You know, and I understand that you and I will differ on the wisdom

...