We don't even need to cut that much.
For GFY 2011, the federal govt received $2.17T, and spent $3.82T.
2012 revenues are estimated at ~$2.5T. If we reduced spending to 2008 levels, minus the GWoT funds, the spending would be (roughly) $2.75T (vs the $3.82T we spent in 2011).
Now, does anyone think we spent "too little" in 2008?! Probably not, but even going back to 2008 funding levels would be an immediate cut of >$1 TRILLION in a SINGLE FISCAL YEAR (considering all the arguments about them trying to cut that over 10).
The dems are screaming about "drastic cuts" (when they are talking $100B a year cut) on the current debate, and think $1T a year cut is "impossible"...when all it takes to get a trillion a year cut is to simply go back less than three years! (in fact, I believe 2008 was the last budget the senate passed)...have things really gone that bad that the amount we spent three years ago would throw granny off a cliff, deprive college students of loans, etc? No.
Not only that, if you then help spending to grow with inflation (let's say 3%), and had an economic growth rate of 5-6% (totally reasonable if Barack wasn't screwing it up)...t
Returning to a 2008 baseline for 2012 would result in a balanced budget inside of 3 years with ZERO revenue changes (we even get to keep the payroll tax cut)