Defending the Truth

Read full story for latest details.

View the full article here.

From the article:

"Only in Washington can $22 billion be called a 'very small difference,"' Bush said after meeting with his Cabinet. "That's a lot of money -- even for career politicians in Washington."

=======

Indeed it is, Mr. Bush. You sure are financially savvy!
I'm sure you know that $22 billion is enough money to:

give a million students full scholarships at a 4 year university.

pay 350,000 public school teachers for a year.

give 13 million uninsured children health coverage for a year.

immunize every child in the developing world for the next 10 years, preventing 3 million deaths a year.


Or you could continue your illegal, pointless war in Iraq for another 11 weeks... with money you are borrowing from China and Japan.

Yet here we are with a budget deficit once again, and a national debt that is ever increasing, and many of the liberals on this board complained about the fiscal irresponsibility of a Republican Congress, only to support he fiscal irresponsibility of a Democrat-Congress.

dmk

I, personally, find spending 22 billion on health care, education and medicines to be fiscally responsible, but spending a trillion dollars having our troops slaughtered in an aggressive war waged on a foreign country that is impossible to win NOT fiscally responsible.

buy, hey!, that's just me...

u cant exsect the rest of the world to allow laws in america created by a communist house senate & congress! musica........possum........catheriwa8....

Ouch!!

1) It's not a Democratic-controlled Congress. It's barely even a majority in the technical sense.

2) The President (let alone enough votes in Congress to override a veto) would never approve of a more sensible economic policy (which would constitute the ending of the financial sink-hole of the Iraq War).

3) If Congress truly went about balancing the budget, you would be crying about a raise in taxes (for the rich anyway) instead of crying about the continued deficit spending. Which will be an inevitable consequence of this administration's run-away spending.

I don't support fiscal irresponsibility by any Congress, regardless of party control.

But it is disingenuous to say that Congress is controlled by any one party unless it is lopsided enough to override a Presidential veto. This Congress cannot do that.

Sure, there is a slight democratic majority at the moment, but the only result so far has been getting Bush to clean the cobwebs off his veto rubber stamper.