Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Add to that the dramatic and excessive federal support for education and health care (No Child Left Behind and Prescription Drug Benefit). GWB, and the r leadership of both the house and senate in the early 90s, were a Democrats in drag. Granted, Dems took this irresponsible spending to entirely new and unforseen levels, but the Rs don't have a lot of credability for fiscal responsibility.
It's pretty simple--the problem is spending that goes to reward campaign donors, and it is a game that both parties have to play to get elected. I think it's a problem to which we currently don't have a solution, but I think we can at least dial it back. If you look at states run by moderate R's like TX, OK, etc. they still have crony capitalism, but they are nowhere near in as bad shape as states like Cali and Ill that are run by lefty D's.
If we keep a smaller peace time military why do we need a draft? Slaves make poor workers.
Mercenaries do abetter job?
Sorry, but we are fighting these wars with kids who enlist and an equal amount of paid mercenaries, who make four times as much as the military. Whatever Blackwater calls itself now, it is the same bunch.
I am trying to figure out the reasoning of my conservative brethren. By 2003, Bush had launched two wars and two tax cuts, all of which continued for the following 5+ years of his presidency. This is so insane on its face that I wonder how people ever felt it was going to be paid for. It is as if he did not care a wit about the true fiscal costs of the wars. He never asked us for sacrifice. No war bonds. Nothing.
So, a blunt question. How do you rationalize massive tax cuts and massive wars and claim to be fiscally responsible?
No sane republican justisfies the Bush administration as fiscally responsible. What a terrible thread.
I am trying to figure out the reasoning of my conservative brethren. By 2003, Bush had launched two wars and two tax cuts, all of which continued for the following 5+ years of his presidency. This is so insane on its face that I wonder how people ever felt it was going to be paid for. It is as if he did not care a wit about the true fiscal costs of the wars. He never asked us for sacrifice. No war bonds. Nothing.
So, a blunt question. How do you rationalize massive tax cuts and massive wars and claim to be fiscally responsible?
Perhaps more people should contribute.
A flat tax would give everyone an opportunity to contribute equally related to their income.
I am trying to figure out the reasoning of my conservative brethren. By 2003, Bush had launched two wars and two tax cuts, all of which continued for the following 5+ years of his presidency. This is so insane on its face that I wonder how people ever felt it was going to be paid for. It is as if he did not care a wit about the true fiscal costs of the wars. He never asked us for sacrifice. No war bonds. Nothing.
So, a blunt question. How do you rationalize massive tax cuts and massive wars and claim to be fiscally responsible?
You can't, and both Democrats and Republicans are to blame. Damned shame. We account for about 50% of all world wide military spending, alone, just us. China is the next largest at 8%. With our close allies, like the UK, France, etc, we account for nearly 70% of all world wide military spending.
Europe has been cutting their defense spending, ours is going up. Hell, Obama is lowering the rate of military spending increase (means its still going up), and Republicans through a hissy. Romney has said he will increase military spending.
I am trying to figure out the reasoning of my conservative brethren. By 2003, Bush had launched two wars and two tax cuts, all of which continued for the following 5+ years of his presidency. This is so insane on its face that I wonder how people ever felt it was going to be paid for. It is as if he did not care a wit about the true fiscal costs of the wars. He never asked us for sacrifice. No war bonds. Nothing.
So, a blunt question. How do you rationalize massive tax cuts and massive wars and claim to be fiscally responsible?
You know what I am trying to figure out?
Why did Obama add troops to Afghanistan, send troops to Egypt, and extend the Bush tax cuts. We spend more on our military now then when Bush was in office. We have more people on disability and food stamps since Obama took office from Daddy Bush (who I did not like at all). I could go on and on about stuff you have no clue about. Put the kool-aid down and find the truth. If you would like some links to some great blogs to read where they do tell the truth private message me and I would be more than glad to give them to you.
true, but compared to the obama administration, bush was a penny pincher.
IIRC, Bush's yearly war expenditures amounted to about 15% of what are now Obama's annual deficits.....or pretty close to that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
