Our Toughest President...Here's The Proof

Whether or not th F-22 or any other weapon system has a a snowball's chance of making us more secure (And I will argue vociferously that they do), why, for the purposes of economic stimulus, should we not fund them?

State senators and representatives are bitching loud and strong about these cuts because, primarily, of their economic input.

So are we to believe that economic stimulus dollars devoted to enhancing the Smithstonian and favoring promotion of condoms is a better spend than improving our defense systems?

If, to revive our economy, we have to vomit billions of taxpayers dollars, doesn't it make more sense to spend this cash on things that even might have a benefit to our security, rather than upscaling a ******* exhibit hall?

If, to revive our economy, we have to vomit billions of taxpayers dollars, doesn't it make more sense to spend this cash on things that even might have a benefit to our security, rather than upscaling a ******* exhibit hall?

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If, to revive our economy, we have to vomit billions of taxpayers dollars, doesn't it make more sense to spend this cash on things that even might have a benefit to our security, rather than upscaling a ******* exhibit hall?

I've said before that I wish every single stimulus dollar was spent on research. Much better for long-term prosperity.

DrewDad wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If, to revive our economy, we have to vomit billions of taxpayers dollars, doesn't it make more sense to spend this cash on things that even might have a benefit to our security, rather than upscaling a ******* exhibit hall?

I've said before that I wish every single stimulus dollar was spent on research. Much better for long-term prosperity.

I agree.

Research that results in the elimination of liberal left wing extremist and liberalism once and for all is money well spent.

I agree.

Research that results in the elimination of liberal left wing extremist and liberalism once and for all is money well spent.

B/c it doesn't provide a good return on the stimulus dollar spent, and we don't need any more of them.

Yes. Our defense systems do not need improving in the slightest.

No, it doesn't make more sense, John. See, you only feel that way if, deep inside, you're a frightened little pussy who wants to see ever-expanding amounts of resources spent 'protecting' you. Grow up a bit and you won't be so scared all the time.

Funny, he's 'gutting' the military by increasing the budget by 4% next year.

Cycloptichorn

In Bush’s first three years funding for the Veterans Administration increased 27%. And if Bush's 2005 budget is approved, funding for his full four-year term will amount to an increase of 37.6%.

In the eight years of the Clinton administration the increase was 31.7%

Those figures include mandatory spending for such things as payments to veterans for service-connected disabilities, over which Congress and presidents have little control. But Bush has increased the discretionary portion of veterans funding even more than the mandatory portion has increased. Discretionary funding under Bush is up 30.2%.

By any measure, veterans funding is going up faster under Bush than under Clinton.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

If, to revive our economy, we have to vomit billions of taxpayers dollars, doesn't it make more sense to spend this cash on things that even might have a benefit to our security, rather than upscaling a ******* exhibit hall?

I've said before that I wish every single stimulus dollar was spent on research. Much better for long-term prosperity.

It's just that simple...right?

Whatever got us to this point based on the good or bad decisions of those who went before us, it's our asses, and the asses of our families and friends that are on the line.

I'm not willing for my family and I to pay for the real or imagined sins of American leaders who are either dead or out of power.

And I know that the vast majority of the hand wringing, Blame America First crowd are not either...no matter what they may say.