Bill Maher Criticizes Elon Musk and DOGE on U.S. Defense Spending Focus

Bill Maher Urges Elon Musk to Target ‘Bloated’ Military Spending

Bill Maher, host of HBOS “Real Time,” dedicated a segment of his show on Friday night to criticizing both Elon Musk and the broader political establishment for what he perceives as a glaring lack of focus on wasteful military spending. Maher specifically called on Musk, along with the fictional defense optimization group DOGE, to apply their purported cost-cutting acumen to the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).

Maher’s commentary was sparked by President Trump’s earlier claim of potential “hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud and abuse” within the military,juxtaposed against the DoD’s recent announcement of a mere $580 million in spending cuts from its massive $900 billion budget. This discrepancy became a focal point for Maher’s broader critique.

“When they were talking about shrinking the government, I said, ‘Yeah, great, but the acid test will be if they go after the biggest bloat of all: obsolete weapons programs,'” Maher stated, setting the stage for his argument.

He than referenced Elon Musk’s past critiques of military spending, specifically Musk’s November post on X, where he implored, “Please, in the name of all that is holy, let us stop the worst military value for money in history that is the F-35 program.”

Maher sarcastically responded, “Exactly your X-cellence,” before pivoting to address the irony he sees in the situation.He noted the announcement of a new fighter jet, the F-47, questioning the need for such programs “in the age of drones”.

“Because I feel like you guys are purposefully avoiding the elephant in the room. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, the two trillion in waste that you originally said you could cut.Yeah, you’re not going to get there by firing mailmen and the guy who tells you to not lean over the rail at the Grand Canyon,” Maher asserted, highlighting the perceived lack of meaningful change.

Maher further criticized the “$35 billion” in savings achieved by DOGE, arguing that they are overlooking the most substantial area for potential cuts: “the fattest target to hunt” which lies “unmolested across the Potomac at the Pentagon, a place Eisenhower warned us was out of control in 19-f—ing-61!” This reference to President Eisenhower’s famous farewell address adds historical weight to Maher’s concerns about the military-industrial complex.

To illustrate his point, Maher presented a pie chart of the $6.8 trillion 2024 federal budget, emphasizing that defense spending accounts for 47% of the $1.8 trillion in discretionary spending while other departments receive significantly less.

“You mean there’s barely a penny of waste in this half?” Maher questioned, pointing to the 47% allocated to defense. “I may not know how to code like Elon’s nerd brigade, but I could read a f—ing pie chart.”

Maher then broadened his criticism to encompass a bipartisan consensus regarding military spending.

“Its amazing. The right and the left in this country despise each other, but they do agree on two things. One,keep an eye on the Jews because they’re always up to something,” Maher joked,before continuing more seriously,“And two,the defense budget is always perfect,like the Virgin Mary. In fact, it’s always okay if it gets bigger. It’s like a fat Virgin Mary.”

He highlighted that U.S. defense spending surpasses the combined spending of the next nine highest-spending countries and cited a 2017 Pentagon study revealing a 19% surplus of bases globally.

“Wouldn’t it be ‘efficient’ to close some of those, the 750 bases in 80 countries we have around the world? We need every one? No place to fire up the old chainsaw there?” asked Maher, suggesting specific areas for potential cuts. “The Air Force has 51 golf courses.The Marines have ten. Guam has two. Nothing? No vroom, vroom for that?”

Maher didn’t limit his critique to the pentagon, also targeting the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), labeling it a “bloated bureaucracy” and a “Frankenstein monster born in the panic after 9/11.” he pointed to the relatively small $50 million cut from DHS’s $170 billion budget.

“So far, DOGE has cut 50 million out of its $170 billion budget. You know, every other part of government has to tighten its belt. How about the part that makes me take mine off at the airport?” Maher questioned, referencing TSA security procedures. “It’s been over 20 years of this bulls—. We started doing it before there were smartphones or AI. I’m guessing there’s a better way to keep this safe than everybody undressing in public.”

He concluded with a pointed observation about the perceived overreaction to security threats.

“No one thinks you need your picture taken to fly from Tulsa to spokane. It’s not 9/11 anymore.It’s 2025. And I’m not afraid of hijackers.I’m afraid of the plane,” he stated, summarizing his argument that security measures have become excessive and outdated.

“It’s amazing. The right and the left in this country despise each other, but they do agree on two things. One, keep an eye on the Jews as they’re always up to something. And two, the defense budget is always perfect, like the Virgin Mary. In fact, it’s always okay if it gets bigger. it’s like a fat Virgin Mary.”

Bill Maher

Potential Areas for military Spending Cuts: A Closer look

Maher’s comments raise meaningful questions about the efficiency and allocation of military resources in the United States. Here’s a brief overview of potential areas for cost-cutting, based on data and insights from government reports and expert analysis:

Area	Potential Savings	Considerations
Unneeded Military Bases	Billions annually	Base closures require political will and can face local opposition due to job losses.
Obsolete Weapons Systems	Significant, varies by program	Terminating programs like the F-35 (as Musk suggested) can be controversial due to existing contracts and perceived national security implications.
Administrative Overhead	Perhaps substantial	Streamlining bureaucratic processes and reducing redundancies can lead to cost savings without impacting military readiness.
Contracting Reform	Varies, but potentially significant	Re-evaluating contracts with private defense contractors to ensure fair pricing and accountability could reduce costs.

Expert Perspectives on Military Spending

the debate over U.S. military spending is complex, with various perspectives from experts across the political spectrum. Some argue that a strong military is essential for national security and global stability, while others advocate for a more restrained approach, prioritizing domestic needs and diplomatic solutions.

Ultimately, the question of how to allocate resources effectively within the military is a matter of ongoing debate and policy decisions. Figures like Bill Maher are contributing to this conversation by challenging conventional wisdom and prompting a re-evaluation of priorities.

What opportunities exist for significant cuts to the U.S. military budget, adn what should policymakers prioritize?

Interview: Analyzing Bill Maher’s Call for Cuts in Military Spending

Archyde News: Welcome, Ms.Anya Sharma, Senior Defense Analyst at the Institute for Strategic Studies. Bill Maher recently made some strong statements regarding the U.S. military budget. What’s your initial reaction?

Anya Sharma: Thank you for having me. Maher’s points, while delivered with his signature style, highlight a persistent and valid concern: the size and efficiency of our defense spending. The sheer scale of the budget demands serious scrutiny.

Archyde News: Maher specifically targeted the DoD and even the Department of Homeland security. Do you agree that these institutions could be streamlined?

Anya Sharma: Absolutely. Areas like base closures,obsolete weapon programs such as the F-35,and administrative overhead present real opportunities for cost savings. The DHS, in particular, has become a vast bureaucracy as 9/11. Re-evaluating its efficiency is crucial.

Archyde News: Maher mentions the F-35 program. Is it reasonable to suggest scrapping such programs, or do they have irreplaceable value?

Anya Sharma: Terminating programs like the F-35 is highly complex. While these weapon systems are expensive, cutting them can have significant implications for national security and existing contracts. Any such decision should be approached based on thorough evaluation, based on realistic cost-benefit analyses and not mere headlines.

Archyde News: He also pointed out the vast number of overseas military bases. Is this level of global presence necessary in 2025?

Anya Sharma: That’s a critical point. A surplus of overseas bases certainly deserves debate. While these bases serve strategic purposes, it’s also worth examining their efficiency and whether choice deployments or partnerships could achieve similar objectives at a lower cost.

Archyde News: One of Maher’s comments was that defense spending is viewed as “untouchable.” Do you see a bipartisan reluctance to seriously address it?

Anya Sharma: Unfortunately, yes. Defense spending often benefits from a consensus based on national security concerns and potential political implications. This political inertia makes it challenging to promote significant reforms.

Archyde News: Looking ahead. considering these points, do you see realistic opportunities for substantial cuts? What should policymakers focus on first?

Anya Sharma: There are opportunities, but there needs to be political will and courage. Prioritizing a top-down review of program performance and a rationalization of overseas bases would be a good start. Reforming the contracting process is also a must to ensure fairness across all stakeholders. It’s a long-term effort, but one that is strategically relevant.

Archyde News: Final question: Maher quipped about the lack of innovation concerning TSA security. What are your thoughts on the current state of airport security?

Anya Sharma: I agree with Maher. The measures were appropriate in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 may be outdated now. Advancements in technology offer an prospect to modernize security procedures and enhance efficiency.

Archyde News: Ms. Sharma, thank you for your insightful commentary on this critical matter.

Anya Sharma: My pleasure.