Why should we vote for anyone in the primaries if they refuse to shout about this great injustice?

[BlueCaliDem]

37. No, you're right...the Pentagon is not a sacred cow and Pentagon leadership have wanted to reduce.

the budget or change it, but Congress won't let them.

Consequently, Bernie Sanders supports the Lockheed Martin F-35, which is called the "epitome of Pentagon waste" - and he's doubled down on defending that spending.

The estimated lifetime expense of the F-35 is $1.2 trillion.

When asked if his support to cut military spending would include the F-35, Sanders said, "No, and I’ll tell you why – it is essentially built. It is the airplane of the United States Air Force, Navy, and of NATO. It was a very controversial issue in Vermont. And my view was that given the fact that the F-35, which, by the way, has been incredibly wasteful, that’s a good question. But for better or worse, that is the plane of record right now, and it is not gonna be discarded. That’s the reality."

A bit of a muddled response, but clearly he has NO PLANS to cut that wasteful military spending.

The Lockheed Martin F-35 is the epitome of Pentagon waste. The program has already cost taxpayers roughly half a trillion dollars, with $700 billion or more to come during the program’s lifetime. During an interview, Pierre Sprey, a co-designer of the F-16, went into great detail about how the F-35 was a lemon aircraft. Sprey explained that the fighter is an excessively heavy gas guzzler with small wings, a low bomb-carry capacity, low loiter time, is incapable of slow flight, is detectable to World War II-era low-frequency radar, and costs $200 million apiece. And just a little over a week ago, the F-35 caught fire on a runway at Eglin Air Force Base.
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/24583-bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-f-35-support-days-after-runway-explosion

I guess Senator Sanders believes some corporations - like Lockheed Martin and other MiC corporations - are good. They create jobs in Vermont, which is a good argument to make, but he forgets to tell his supporters that other corporations do the same and don't get 82% of their revenue from American taxpayers. Can this be called corporate socialism?