Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-22-2012, 12:30 PM
 
10,875 posts, read 13,809,014 times
Reputation: 4896

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wrench409 View Post
Just what history book did you read this in?

Please go back and check the true democrats history regarding Iraq.
I agree, I'd suggest you educate yourself to see why the whole "they have WMD's and we know where they are" lies were spread to congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2012, 12:31 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,096,009 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
I agree, I'd suggest you educate yourself to see why the whole "they have WMD's and we know where they are" lies were spread to congress.
The poster you are responding to said nothing about WMD's, they questioned where you got the ridiculous notion that Democrats opposed the war.

I'm still waiting for you to point out to me where the Democrats stopped the spending like you claimed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Inwood
552 posts, read 738,514 times
Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
A little exaggerated there, aren't you?

Besides....EVERY action that Bush made was truly bi-partisan.

Such "neo-cons" as nancy pelosi, john edwards, john kerry, barney frank, ted kennedy, hillary clinton etc. voted for the war funding.

The lefties started banging the drums of war long before Bush was in the White House.

In the mean time, obama is STILL in an offensive stance when it comes to foreign policy, such as drone bombing and such.
How is that an exaggeration, I would call it a defensive stance considering the amount of troops that are home. For what it's worth I wish we didn't have a soldier in iraq or afghanistan. I don't care who voted for what, the 4 trillion in waste on wars was far worse then the stimulus.

Where did you get your list of liberals who voted for the war? Unless you are refering to just the funding part...

Iraq War Vote in 2002: Honoring the 23 Senate and 133 House Members Who Voted NAY
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 12:35 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,096,009 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by boycewv View Post
How is that an exaggeration, I would call it a defensive stance considering the amount of troops that are home. For what it's worth I wish we didn't have a soldier in iraq or afghanistan. I don't care who voted for what, the 4 trillion in waste on wars was far worse then the stimulus.
They didnt spend anywhere close to $4T on the wars..
Quote:
Originally Posted by boycewv View Post
Where did you get your list of liberals who voted for the war? Unless you are refering to just the funding part...

Iraq War Vote in 2002: Honoring the 23 Senate and 133 House Members Who Voted NAY

Democrats before Iraq War started.... - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,464,288 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by boycewv View Post
How is that an exaggeration, I would call it a defensive stance considering the amount of troops that are home. For what it's worth I wish we didn't have a soldier in iraq or afghanistan. I don't care who voted for what, the 4 trillion in waste on wars was far worse then the stimulus.

Where did you get your list of liberals who voted for the war? Unless you are refering to just the funding part...

Iraq War Vote in 2002: Honoring the 23 Senate and 133 House Members Who Voted NAY
At least Congress got a chance to vote on that.
How about the nearly $1 trillion the US spent on the Libya invasion ?
Congress didn't get any chances to hear stories or vote on it. Our President made that decision all by himself with UN consent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 12:44 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,458,172 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
They didnt spend anywhere close to $4T on the wars..


Democrats before Iraq War started.... - YouTube
You know those whimsical *******s. Devote that you'll give a gazillion man hours until it's not politically cool anymore then throw them all under the bus. It's the democrats modus operandi.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 01:11 PM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,047,114 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interlude View Post
I realize that it's easier to just rant and rave rather than look anything up but FCS people it's pretty easy information to find. It's on friggen wikipedia. The total program was $831 billion broke down as follows:

$237 billion went to tax credits for individuals (payroll tax cut, increase AMT floor, child tax credit, homebuyer credit, etc.)
$51 billion went to tax credits for companies (shifting losses around, tax credits for various activities)
$155 billion went to healthcare (Medicaid, technology investments, COBRA subsidy, etc.)
$100 billion went to education (aid to local school districts, grants, programs like Head Start)
$82.2 billion went to extend unemployment, food stamps, direct payment to SS recipients, job training, etc.
$105 billion to infrastructure
$18 billion for water, sewage, environment and public lands
$7.2 billion for gov't buildings
$10.5 billion for communications
$21 billion for energy infrastructure (mostly nuclear weapon production cleanup)
$27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research
$14.75 billion for housing
$7.6 billion for scientific research
$10.6 billion for various other stuff including $4 billion to local law enforcement

At the time, economists felt that the program was too small to counter the economic downturn. It was. We should have spent a whole lot more, but as usual the GOP won't let us have nice things.
LOL!

Government isn't SUPPOSED to "give" you ANYTHING!

You can have all the nice things that you want. You just have to EARN them.

Here's the definition, since it seems to be lost on lefties.....

earn 1 (ûrn)tr.v. earned, earn·ing, earns 1. To gain especially for the performance of service, labor, or work: earned money by mowing lawns.
2. To acquire or deserve as a result of effort or action: She earned a reputation as a hard worker.
3. To yield as return or profit: a savings account that earns interest on deposited funds.

Idiom: earn (one's) spurs/stripes To gain a position through hard work and the accumulation of experience, often in the face of difficulties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 01:18 PM
 
Location: Inwood
552 posts, read 738,514 times
Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
At least Congress got a chance to vote on that.
How about the nearly $1 trillion the US spent on the Libya invasion ?
Congress didn't get any chances to hear stories or vote on it. Our President made that decision all by himself with UN consent.
Please enlighten me with a source...I'd like to see you cite the 1 trillion spent in libya lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,945,761 times
Reputation: 5661
Your answer is easily available:
Breakdown of Funding

Total Funds Allocated: $840 Billion

Tax Benefit: $297.8 Billion
Contracts Grants and Loans: $230.5 Billion
Entitlements: $223.7 Billion

As you can see, the largest single portion was tax benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,945,761 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
At least Congress got a chance to vote on that.
How about the nearly $1 trillion the US spent on the Libya invasion ?
You are only three zeros off:
US Military Intervention in Libya Cost At Least $896 Million
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:45 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top