Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush wants us to cut spending here in America to continue to pay for his military adventures abroad

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 11:41 AM
Original message
Bush wants us to cut spending here in America to continue to pay for his military adventures abroad
Edited on Sun Feb-04-07 12:35 PM by bigtree
February 4, 2007


Bush Elevates Iraq and Afghanistan Over the Rest of the Nation's Priorities


. . . in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity . . .

This week Bush will ask Congress to consider his budget limiting the spending of our tax dollars on almost everything else, except to support his militarism abroad. Bush told Americans in his weekly radio address, that, they should continue to bear the costs of his dual Mideast occupations and the deficit he's used to fund them, because, he's busy "keeping America safe and winning the war against extremists who want to destroy our way of life."

Bush told Americans that he intends to continue to reach in and rob the treasury to continue his military adventurism; keeping the massive tax breaks in place that he and his republicans passed for their wealthy benefactors when they had the majority, while the rest of the country scrambles for the rest of the spattered remains of precious meal from Congress' pig's trough. "Congress needs to make this tax relief permanent, so we can keep America's economy growing," Bush said.

"Cutting the deficit during a time of war requires us to restrain spending in other areas," he told Americans.

Those "other areas" Bush wants to 'restrain' include Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. "Together, we can pass a budget that keeps our economy strong, keeps America safe, and makes deficit spending a thing of the past," he said.

It's as if Bush is wishing himself away as his own zeal and unquenchable appetite for our money and manpower to fuel his occupations looms as the largest factor in any decline of our nation's safety. Whatever increase in the budget deficit that's occurred in Bush's term has been aggravated by his administration's inability to keep the costs of his warmongering within our nation's means.

The NYT reported that Bush wants $100 billion for the dual-occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan for the rest of the current fiscal year that ends on September 30 and $145 billion for next year.

There we have it . . . Bush wants to continue his militarism and have us all pay for it. In his plan, the Defense budget shoots up by 10.5 percent to $481 billion, and the rest of the priorities for the nation will have to wait. That's a prescription for the quickening of the disintegration of a weak and fearful nation, at the desperate, vain hands of the weak and fearful lame-ducks in the White House; all for the sake of continuing Bush's Iraq folly.

All of Bush's prattling about what he wants to do with our money will amount to nothing more than our Democrats at the gateway of those funds will allow. Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. John Murtha said this week he thinks that, "through the appropriations process, we will be able to change the direction of this war.”

“We control the funds, and (Bush) controls the troops,” Murtha said Monday after returning from a trip to Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan with Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

In this week's Democratic radio address, Majority Whip, Rep. Jim Clyburn said that Democrats will conduct oversight of the Administration's conduct of the war in Iraq and seek a de-escalation of combat, and redeployment of our troops. Others in both houses of Congress will go even further with binding rebukes of Bush's escalation and demands for an actual drawdown of forces in Iraq to end the occupation.

We can't forget that our Democrats weren't given a large enough majority to just roll over the opposition on these major issues and initiatives. But, Democrats will do something similar to what Bush tried yesterday when he threw out Democratic initiatives which he'd blocked for the entirety of his term as if to say, bend my way on Iraq and I'll give on these things you say you want. Democrats will have more than enough opportunities to pressure republicans, who need to bring home bacon, to bend on Iraq.

The republicans in Congress are still attempting to block the door as we pressure the White House, even after the drumming they got in November. We need to keep reminding Americans just who is keeping our troops bogged down in Iraq. That'll come from the binding bills which directly confront Bush and his conduct. The House has the most power to push through that type of a partisan bill, and then the Senate will have to act. If they manage to get a bill together it will go to a certain Bush veto, barring some scenario-altering catastrophe in Iraq. That veto will be the flashpoint for the legislators' activism, and ours too, as they move to overturn it. That's where the political, constitutional battles will come to a head.

We'll need all of the undiluted pressure we can manage against the republican enabler/obstructionists if we're to move the administration before the next presidential election cycle starts dominating everything and mucks it all up. Standing firm on reversing the rape of our treasury by fat-cats and militarists for six years will be the Democrats' most worthwhile pursuit as they look for a lever to hold Bush accountable.

With all of his budgetary priorities geared toward the expansion of his military occupations and whatever else he might be planning to do abroad with our soldiers, it should be more than obvious to the public who rejected these republican priorities in the last election that Bush and his party have no intention at all of listening to them, and shouldn't be allowed to spend another dime of our money for anymore of his American soldier-killing adventures abroad at the expense of the other countless, pressing needs here at home.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
natrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. read:print as much money as possible and pump into military industrial complex
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Iraq war costs over $3 Billion a week
Edited on Sun Feb-04-07 12:21 PM by teryang
Remember when they said it would only cost $40 Billion total? They project the cost going down in FY 2008 and FY 2009. On what basis?

The costs can only go up. Downstream costs such as Veterans benefits and disability not included. Opportunity costs, as in damage to the social fabric, not included.

This is insanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. link to final (edited) version
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. remember the "low ball" 2 Trillion estimate from last yer?
Iraq war could cost US over $2 trillion, says Nobel prize-winning economist


· Economists say official estimates are far too low
· New calculation takes in dead and injured soldiers

Jamie Wilson in Washington
Saturday January 7, 2006
The Guardian


The real cost to the US of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (£1.1 trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert.
The study, which expanded on traditional estimates by including such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concluded that the US government is continuing to underestimate the cost of the war.

The report came during one of the most deadly periods in Iraq since the invasion, with the US military yesterday revising upwards to 11 the number of its troops killed during a wave of insurgent attacks on Thursday. More than 130 civilians were also killed when suicide bombers struck Shia pilgrims in Karbala and a police recruiting station in Ramadi.

The paper on the real cost of the war, written by Joseph Stiglitz, a Columbia University professor who won the Nobel prize for economics in 2001, and Linda Bilmes, a Harvard budget expert, is likely to add to the pressure on the White House on the war. It also followed the revelation this week that the White House had scaled back ambitions to rebuild Iraq and did not intend to seek funds for reconstruction.

Mr Stiglitz told the Guardian that despite the staggering costs laid out in their paper the economists had erred on the side of caution. "Our estimates are very conservative, and it could be that the final costs will be much higher. And it should be noted they do not include the costs of the conflict to either Iraq or the UK." In 2003, as US and British troops were massing on the Iraq border, Larry Lindsey, George Bush's economic adviser, suggested the costs might reach $200bn. The White House said the figure was far too high, and the deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, said Iraq could finance its own reconstruction.

Three years later, with more than 140,000 US soldiers on the ground in Iraq, even the $200bn figure was very low, according to the two economists.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1681119,00.html

.... and the pace has not slowed. I bet we are closer to 5 trillion before this insanity ends. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-05-07 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. Bush Plan Seeks Billions More for Iraq
Bush's $2.9 Trillion Spending Plan Provides Billions for Iraq War, Restraints on Health Care


WASHINGTON Feb 5, 2007 (AP)— President Bush is sending Congress a $2.9 trillion budget that would provide billions of dollars for the war in Iraq, make his first-term tax cuts permanent and achieve a budget surplus three years after he leaves office.

Faced with the competing goals of funding the war effort, preserving his first-term tax cuts and still achieving a balanced budget, the president stuck mostly with modest new initiatives.

To accomplish that goal, Bush would allow only modest growth in the government programs outside of defense and homeland security. He is proposing eliminations or sharp reductions in 141 government programs, for a savings over five years of $12 billion, although Congress has rejected many of the same proposals over the past two years.

Bush also will seek to trim spending on farm subsidies by $18 billion over five years, mainly by reducing payments to wealthier farmers, an effort certain to spark resistance among farm state lawmakers.

Bush would achieve nearly $100 billion in savings over five years by trimming increases in Medicare, the health insurance program for 43 million retirees and the disabled, and Medicaid, which provides health care to the poor. That effort is also likely to trigger heavy opposition in Congress, which rejected smaller Bush cuts last year.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2848663&page=2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. how about cut all corporate subsidies, tax breaks, and loopholes and assess a user fee on big oil
for use of our military?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. user fee on big oil
for use of our military

PERFECT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. That'll happen when Hell freezes over. Oh wait, with shrub and his non action
on Global Warming, that may happen soon, Hell freezing over that is. The other won't matter so much, then. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raifield Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
8. We have to spend it there
So that we don't have to spend it here.

Makes about as much sense as anything else he's done, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. they hate our economic freedoms
parasites
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
10. That's exactly what he wants. He reminds me of the guy
who empties out the family bank account to throw a party for his pals, and then tells the wife to quit grocery shopping for a while because there's no moany.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
11. K and R! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blues90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. Why don't they just get out the vacuums ?
And suck out all our money now and get it over with . They can blow the hell out of Iran and begin WW III and just get it over , those who are left can deal with the fallout .

I am so sick of watching money go by the truck load to support their war dreams .

Hell they stood by and let many people suffer and die right here in the miss gulf coast and new orleans so here is all we really need as proof to where we are heading and how we are thought of as so much nothing .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. How are we going to pay the people who don't pay taxes?
Edited on Sun Feb-04-07 11:04 PM by underpants
I know that, as they say, the Federal Gubment ain't no so effective but hell it pays the bills.

It's quite the trick to own the people who don't make you pay taxes and then give you government money-cost+ contracts, HCA medicaid fraud, Dynacorp privatized military and such, and blames the poor for the whole thing.

Where can I get in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
13. democracy or empire
one or the other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. the imaginer-in-chief will always see America as an empire to be conquered
Edited on Sun Feb-04-07 10:57 PM by bigtree
he's waking up to the reality of our democracy

he's really over the edge
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC