at $1.1 trillion to $1.7 trillion dollars? Isn't it just more hypocrisy that they complain about what our deficit is, but it was okay for Bush to throw away that kind of money on an illegal war? Explain it to me like a three-year-old.Why didn't the Republicans rant and rave when in 2007, the CBO estimated the cost of war for 10yrs would be?
Republicans dont feel that taking care of the less fortunate is the responsibility of the federal government.
However, national offense and foreign nation building is something they feel is the role of the federal government. Spending money to kill people who were never a threat in order to gain a strategic advantage on the world stage is more important to them than making sure our own people are getting food and medical care.
The sad thing is that a lot of spineless Democrats also went along with it, including our first lady. Gore and Dashal also caved in and that **** stain on humanity Joe Liberman practically kissed Bush on the lips when he announced the invasion of Iraq.Why didn't the Republicans rant and rave when in 2007, the CBO estimated the cost of war for 10yrs would be?
Bush didn't tell us we would be able to afford the war with current govt funds and by the time the bills started really piling up, we were already in Iraq.
(And for the record the Iraq war has not yet hit $1 Trillion)
http://www.costofwar.com
in fact the cost of Iraq AND Afganistan together are less than $1 Trillion
And most importantly...Much of the moeny spent on those wars was money that was ALREADY money that was going to the military budget. All those soldier in Iraq were going to be getting paid their salaries, the bullets were going to get fired at the range instead of at bad guys, they were still going to use a bunch of gas training etc. etc.
Or remember the press conference where a reporter mentioned the Iraq war might cost 60 billion dollars and Bush scoffed at the notion calling it ridiculous?
Their message is clear - a trillion dollars to attack a country that was no threat to us and kill tens of thousands of people is fine, but don't we dare spend money on fixing our healthcare system.
Even if I conceded your point (which I don't), the best possible argument you can construct is that if the Republicans overspent on the War, consistency demands acceptance of Democrats quadrupling the deficit in advancing their agenda. That's just dumb.
If Bush's deficit was SO BAD, why are you perfectly happy with Obama's deficit, that is 4 TIMES LARGER!!!!
Epitome of hypocrisy.
BTW- We did criticize. CONSERVATIVES never liked the deficit, which is why the GOP lost seats in 2006 and 2008.
no one expected the new prez to spend more in his first 4 months than the last 20 presidents combined. the war is nothing compared to the carjacking we have received, and the home invasion robbery that is about to occur.
your a good typest for 3yrs. old...I'm not a repub. but can tell you, when you have all your credit cards already maxed out, do you go to the mall and spend more that you can't pay....or this way...if you spend all your money on candy, do you really think someone is going to give you all the rest of the candy in the store just because your a cute little girl???
I'm hearing from you that two wrongs do make a right. Bush did it, and you were against it, but that's what makes it okay to do now. Brilliant analysis on your part.
Its called don't tattle about our record tattle about theirs, the rest of you drink your milk and eat your cookies or just take a nap and ThumperD stop prancing.
We did rant and rave.
And just one BILL Obama wants will cost that. Even without it they are expecting a two trillion dollar deficit JUST FOR THIS YEAR.
The man is a disaster.
A three year old defends Obama's spending spree but continues to blame Bush. The libs have had control of congress since 06 and things have gone to pot since!
Your freedom isn't free. War is necessary to protect you and your family.
Hey 3 year old, you know nothing.
No comments:
Post a Comment