Bush Communications Director Admits They Set “Trap” For Obama That “Feels Pretty Good”
Dan Barlett, the communications director in the George W. Bush administration, admitted to Howard Kurtz at The Daily Beast that making tax cuts temporary was a conscious effort to make a problem for the following administration.
“We knew that, politically, once you get it into law, it becomes almost impossible to remove it,” says Dan Bartlett, Bush’s former communications director. “That’s not a bad legacy. The fact that we were able to lay the trap does feel pretty good, to tell you the truth.”
…
…by moving up the expiration date by nine months, the Bush team saved $100 billion and made the bill’s deficit-busting impact appear smaller.
As an added bonus, the “sunset” provision, in Beltway-speak, was a political time bomb: At some point in the way distant future, Democrats could be accused of raising taxes if they tried to undo the Bush breaks and return to Clinton-era levels of taxation.
As David Di Martino at The Hill put it:
Bartlett feels pretty good. Isn’t that terrific? Here we are, dealing with the worst economy in decades, the worst deficits in history, crippling debt to competitors like China — all brought to America under President Bush’s brand of leadership and economic wisdom, and Bartlett feels pretty good about it. Heck, he’s bragging about it!
Hey it’s all politics right? Let’s start two wars and not pay for them, let’s drive millions of Americans out of their jobs, let’s ignore intelligence warnings about terrorist attacks while we clear brush, let’s lie to the world about WMDs so we can go to war and nation-build in Iraq and Afghanistan and send our troops over there to die, and let’s cut taxes and — most importantly — skyrocket spending so our country’s fiscal house collapses under the weight of all this long after we’ve moved out of the White House so that we can win some elections in 2010. Brilliant!
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2010 Liberaland
abbyjo2001 May 20th, 2014 at 18:39
I think the only thing they have trapped are themselves.
abbyjo2001 May 20th, 2014 at 18:39
I think the only thing they have trapped are themselves.
Sweetpeace May 20th, 2014 at 19:38
Listen to the Thom Hartmann call-in archive from 2010. There was some pretty squirrely stuff going on across the country. I think some people who should have known much better got suckered into cutting their own noses off to spite Obama’s face.
Sweetpeace May 20th, 2014 at 19:38
Listen to the Thom Hartmann call-in archive from 2010. There was some pretty squirrely stuff going on across the country. I think some people who should have known much better got suckered into cutting their own noses off to spite Obama’s face.
radsenior May 20th, 2014 at 19:40
Trap for Obama – Hmmmmm..Sounds like John Cornyn workig in concert with others to do an end-around much like Ronald Reagan did. “W” Bush borrowed from the SS fund after Reagan borrowed from it first! With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people. April 20, 1983, has become a day of shame. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue. The mechanism, which allowed the government to transfer $2.7 trillion from the Social Security fund to the general fund over a 30-year period, was the brainchild of President Ronald Reagan and his advisers, especially Alan Greenspan.
radsenior May 20th, 2014 at 19:40
Trap for Obama – Hmmmmm..Sounds like John Cornyn workig in concert with others to do an end-around much like Ronald Reagan did. “W” Bush borrowed from the SS fund after Reagan borrowed from it first! With the help of Alan Greenspan, Reagan pulled off one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated against the American people. April 20, 1983, has become a day of shame. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 laid the foundation for 30-years of federal embezzlement of Social Security money in order to use the money to pay for wars, tax cuts and other government programs. The payroll tax hike of 1983 generated a total of $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue. The mechanism, which allowed the government to transfer $2.7 trillion from the Social Security fund to the general fund over a 30-year period, was the brainchild of President Ronald Reagan and his advisers, especially Alan Greenspan.
mea_mark May 20th, 2014 at 20:00
Sounds about right, the republican party sacrificing good hard working average Americans so the republican party can make their ideological enemy look bad. I hope the very wealthy are happy with their pawns in the republican party and the damage they have done. As Americans get better educated the rest of us aren’t going to be. When we get really mad, we can and do, put party aside to take care of business and that day is coming soon.
Kingminnie May 20th, 2014 at 23:58
I would wish so, but I don’t know. Just visit a right wing page and see how everything, I mean everything is Obama’s or Hillary’s fault. I’m sure you have seen these pages, but the comments you can read there makes one worry, and wonder how some people can just hang on whatever they’re told, no matter how ridiculous and repeat, stir, and repeat.
Did you know Michelle Obama was really born a male? Yeah, visit one of those pages…
mea_mark May 20th, 2014 at 20:00
Sounds about right, the republican party sacrificing good hard working average Americans so the republican party can make their ideological enemy look bad. I hope the very wealthy are happy with their pawns in the republican party and the damage they have done. As Americans get better educated the rest of us aren’t going to be. When we get really mad, we can and do, put party aside to take care of business and that day is coming soon.
Kingminnie May 20th, 2014 at 23:58
I would wish so, but I don’t know. Just visit a right wing page and see how everything, I mean everything is Obama’s or Hillary’s fault. I’m sure you have seen these pages, but the comments you can read there makes one worry, and wonder how some people can just hang on whatever they’re told, no matter how ridiculous and repeat, stir, and repeat.
Did you know Michelle Obama was really born a male? Yeah, visit one of those pages…
bobzmcishl May 20th, 2014 at 20:24
Those “temporary” tax cuts and an unfunded war led to the biggest deficit run-up in our history, and they even managed to blame Obama for the ongoing costs of these two fiasco’s. The tea party types are the worst in their ignorance of how the deficits really came about.
1fullsailkid . May 20th, 2014 at 23:26
I love how they’re all flipping out about the care soldiers are getting at the VA now too. Like its Obama’s fault the VA is packed with Veterans that Bush put there.
Shawn Klaus May 20th, 2014 at 23:38
Not to mention the VA budget House rethuglicans cut to the point of forcing the situation. Just like Benghazi, and everything else they’ve done to this country for the last 13 years.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 02:53
VA is pack with WWII, Korean and Vietnam vets. Very few from Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars started under Dem. administrations. Dems seem to start or escalate the wars. Obama tried to get us into Libya and Sryia.
davidwachtel1 May 21st, 2014 at 03:22
Kevin- You have not responded to the fact that Bush started 2 unfunded wars that have cost tens and tens of thousands of deaths and put this nation into a horrible position, economically. Also, if Obama was like Bush we would be in both of those countries for a decade, off the books.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 04:07
So you wanted a war tax? And as far as WMD, we have now found that a neighbouring country has them. Iraq had previously used them. And yet you still harp on Bush for removing a butcher like Hussein?
davidwachtel1 May 21st, 2014 at 04:24
Absolutely have a war tax. We did not experience any sacrifice over these two wars (except for the G!s and their families). A war tax would force us to minimize the number of wars and make us ALL sacrifice. You are beating a dead dog-there were no WMDs and the Bush Administration knew it. They lied to us over and over-look at Powell at the UN and Rice on the mushroom cloud analogy, for a start. Finally, you seem to justify having these wars UNFUNDED and thus pass the expense on to the next president and generations.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 05:43
But did they lie about WMD? Where did Syria get theirs? From Hussein or make themselves. With the way the weapon inspectors got blocked, it was reasonable to think they were hiding something. At least this time we got rid of the regime that was oppressing so many. And as far as a war tax, might be a good excuse if the money actually went to the cost. But then you might try to bring a victory in under budget and end up killing even more people. Of course no liberal has ever tried paying for a war that they gotten us into except maybe FDR. And don’t think WW2 came in on budget.
TiredOfThemAll May 21st, 2014 at 06:01
But did they lie about WMD? Where did Syria get theirs?
_______
Of Course they did;
Just a few examples;
3/15/2002; British intel reports that there’s only “sporadic and patchy” evidence of Iraqi
WMD. “There is no intelligence on any [biological weapons] production facilities.”
May, 2002; Primary corroborator of Curveball’s claims
that Iraq has mobile weapons labs is judged a liar and Chalabi plant by DIA. A
fabricator warning is posted in US intelligence databases.
NYT publishes everything that Scooter Libby whispers in Judith Miller’s dear little ear, than Cheney cites the NYT as corroboration..
9/7/02 Bush
claims a new UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report states Iraq is
six months from developing a nuclear weapon. There is no such report.
9/8/02; Tubes
“are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs…we don’t want the
smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”—Rice on CNN
9/8/02 “We
do know, with absolute certainty, that he is using his procurement system to
acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear
weapon.”—Cheney on Meet the Press
9/19/02 Classified
UK memo notes there’s “no definitive intelligence that [the aluminum tubes
are] destined for a nuclear programme.”
9/23/02 Institute for Science and
International Security releases report calling the aluminum- tube intelligence
ambiguous and warning that “U.S. nuclear experts who dissent from the
Administration’s position are expected to remain silent.
We set set up these regimes that oppress so many, then take them down, when they no longer suit us, which causes more suffering for so many, resulting in the kind of chaos the causes even more suffering.
Syria got their weapons from Russia, but seriously, if Saddam had them, and he knew they were coming for him, why would he give them away?
That’s like having guns, and sending them away as somebody is breaking into your house.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:15
So there was some evidence, you admit. Enough to indicate that there might be something there. After Clinton devastated the human intelligence side of things, information became harder to confirm.
arc99 May 21st, 2014 at 18:28
so blame President Clinton for mistakes that happened on President Bush’s watch. while at the same time you condemn President Obama for not taking responsibility. typical right wing hypocrisy.
TiredOfThemAll May 21st, 2014 at 18:52
There was nothing there.
Here is the one, and the only reason they wanted to go into Iraq;
Let’s all go to the yard sale; Iraq’s Economic
Liberalisation.
The Economist Sept. 2003
“If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist’s dream
If carried through, the measures will
represent the kind of wish-list that foreign investors and donor agencies dream of for developing markets. Investors in any field, except for all-important oil production and refining, would be allowed 100% ownership of Iraqi assets, full
repatriation of profits, and equal legal standing with local firms. Foreign banks would be welcome to set up shop immediately, or buy into Iraqi ventures.”
http://www.economist.com/node/2092719
carowe May 21st, 2014 at 09:29
yes, dumbhead. They lied about WMD. Iraq does not equal Syria. Quit salivating over FOX and learn some actual facts.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:13
Try reading something other than Huffington and CNN. They were mistaken about the WMD. It was a reasonable mistake. Since when have liberals cared bout facts, beyond a headline.
Molly NYC May 21st, 2014 at 09:49
YES, the Republican administration lied about the WMDs.
God, you’re naive.
Also, you have a lousy memory. When Saddam saw Bush/Cheney was serious about going to war, he stopped blocking the weapons inspectors and let them see everything they wanted. Every military installation, every nook, every cranny.
About two weeks before the inspectors said they’d be done, the Republicans–who had at that point been beating the war drum for at least seven months–suddenly needed to invade right that week. Big emergency.
They didn’t want the inspectors to finish for the same reason Saddam initially didn’t want them to start: They would have shown that Iraq didn’t have WMDs.
As for “the regime that was oppressing so many”–WE are the ones who got literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed and hundreds of thousands of them maimed. WE are the ones who turned two and a half MILLION Iraqis into refugees.
Even Saddam’s record wasn’t that bad–and he was a psychopath.
And as far as paying for the war goes, it didn’t happen because the Republicans didn’t care. It was was a total non-issue to them, because the war was driven by the same thing that drove everything else in the last administration: making government into a conduit between the GOP’s donors and the US Treasury and credit lines (and other assets belonging to the American people).
There is simply nothing they did for eight years straight, no matter how outwardly incompetent, ill-advised or insane, that didn’t make perfect sense in the light of a goal to enrich their clients at the expense of the American people.
Our Republican brethren complain about the budget now (even though the Republican-created deficit has been cut by half under the Obama Administration). But as they didn’t complain about it during their administration, there’s no reason to take them seriously now.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:09
We didn’t turn anyone into refugees. Iraqis got themselves killed by supporting a racist dictator. They had an opportunity to get rid of him, but Bush Sr. Blew their chance. Many Iraqis welcomed American and British involvement and liberation.I thought you liberals liked fighting against racist?
jasperjava May 21st, 2014 at 19:24
“I thought you liberals liked fighting against racist?”
Why do you think you’re getting all this opposition?
We can’t stand stupidity and ignorance, and it galls me that people who are so misinformed can vote.
Ted Govostis May 22nd, 2014 at 07:27
Bush Sr. didn’t “blow his chance”. He knew that as horrible as Hussein was, the sectarian violence that would follow afterwards was worse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
mea_mark May 22nd, 2014 at 09:03
Liberals fight racism. There is a distinct difference between racism and a racist. Liberals in general don’t like to fight anybody. We would like to enlighten people to a more progressed evolved point of view. It would be nice if we could banish racism to the dustbin of history. War and fighting should not be liked by anyone, it is a primitive way of resolving issues.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 12:29
Unfortunately, some people count that view as a weakness. Opening g the people up for attack. The communist frequently America was to weak to defend it self. There , are many primitives still in the world.
The liberals liberals then to encourage racism, by their policies. If conservatives did some of the same would be strung up.everyone needs to be held to the same standard. That is the only way to have true racial equality.
TiredOfThemAll May 23rd, 2014 at 12:44
The liberals liberals then to encourage racism, by their policies. If conservatives did some of the same would be strung up.everyone ne
________
Thou dost project too much, Methinks.
mea_mark May 24th, 2014 at 08:42
Projecting idiocy that is for sure. Sometimes I’m not sure what he is trying to say, or even if he knows, what he is trying to say.
Molly NYC May 31st, 2014 at 11:54
Kevin: Sadly, people like you have established that what you self-described “conservatives” like is whatever Fox News, Rush et al. tell you that liberals oppose, and vice versa.
What self-described “conservatives” don’t like is taking responsibility for their own actions–including pretending that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis we killed all committed suicide.
Kevin Stall June 1st, 2014 at 18:22
Sorry to disappoint you but not everyone watches Fox news. Though it has to be better than the other three. I use to watch all three major networks and never watched fox.
Actually, conservatives tend to take responsibility for their actions. They expect everyone to, instead of blaming others. If the “refugees” would work to make their country better, the problems would better. Yet they prefer to take the easy way and flee their countries. Things tend to improve after with the US. We rebuild them, hire thousands and raise the living standard. At the end of second world war, we didn’t cut Nazis any slack for supporting Hitler. Should we do different for the Iraqis? Particularly when the people killing our troops are not in uniform or in a recognized national army. UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW the should be executed.
TiredOfThemAll June 1st, 2014 at 18:41
“Actually, conservatives tend to take responsibility for their actions”
_______
No they don’t.
Conservatives tend to blame the poor, the blacks, the browns, that gays and women.
Those who ran the policies in Iraq have no idea who the “Iraqis” were.
Kevin Stall June 2nd, 2014 at 04:36
It’s liberals who blame the conservatives for everything. George Bush caused all this to happen.
Liberals give excuses to the different groups. Doesn’t hold everyone to the same standards. Look how you treat the black members of the tea party? Or Sarah Palin. The governor of Louisiana. All these are conservative, from your underdog group. Working for all the people.
Liberal racism is the worse type, worse than the clan. You think that on an equal playing field, they are held back. But yet you have people like Allen west who has made something of himself without special treatment. Something given isn’t as valuable as something earned. A education that is achieved despite poor conditions is a better one than one that is received in optimum conditions. Assuming that they can’t achieve unless given special treatment is racist of the worse type. At least with the clan, you know they are ignorant.
TiredOfThemAll June 2nd, 2014 at 07:06
It’s liberals who blame the conservatives for everything.
______
So, you think they are taking a page from the GOP’s ‘blame Clinton and liberals for everything’??
The point is you have have to back it up. We can show a direct proportionality between the policies of Reagan, including the conservative policies of Clinton, and the economic decline of the middle class in America.
“Look how you treat the black members of the tea party…..?????
Are you kidding?
Compared to how YOU treat the corresponding liberals?
When these people say false and stupid things that are meant only to pander to the base and appeal to the corporate welfare queens, they SHOULD be called out on it.
That is how calling out racism is the new racism.
More accurately;
CONSERVATIVE racism is the worse type, worse than the Klan. You FEAR that on an equal playing field, they will compete.
That is why you need to keep the opportunities exclusive.
People like Clarence Thomas benefitted greatly from Affirmative Action, then pulled the ladder up.
Allen West???
He disgraced himself in the military, and then disgraced himself as an elected official. He is now someone who will spout off any inanity for no other reason than as click bait and to rile up a small niche.
” Assuming that they can’t achieve unless given special treatment is racist of the worse type.” … This attitude along with the constant reference to the ‘Democratic plantation’, shows that you don’t even seem to realize that you are saying these groups of people are too stupid or ignorant to know with whom their best interests lie.
Molly NYC June 2nd, 2014 at 12:57
No. You self-described “conservatives” never take responsibility for what happens on your watch.
And when you talk about responsibility–which you do a lot–all you ever say is that it’s someone else’s.
___
Oh, and “UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW” (as you put it)–Bush, Cheney and about half their cabinet should be on trial at the Hague.
patuxant May 21st, 2014 at 13:43
ASSCLOWN!
jasperjava May 21st, 2014 at 19:26
“no liberal has ever tried paying for a war that they gotten us into except maybe FDR. And don’t think WW2 came in on budget.”
Sounds like you’re upset that we defeated Hitler. It figures.
TiredOfThemAll May 21st, 2014 at 05:19
No, they did not have them. They had other wmd that they got from Russia.
And when Iraq had previously used them, (after we sold them to him and propped him up), we did nothing.
And we caused more harm in the region, including delivering Iraq to Iran, than anything, just to pursue a PNAC plan from 1999.
carowe May 21st, 2014 at 09:28
convenient twisting of facts to support your rightwad dipshittery. Iraq was no threat to the U.S. Bushstink took us to war because he’s a brainless little boy who had his lace panties in a wad over his own dad’s near miss, and he was ready to use any excuse to plunge us into a financially devastating war that he then tried to hide from the accountants and couldn’t be bothered to pay for with a war tax – which he should have levied. His rethugturd cohorts would have found the honesty of that too much to swallow. If it had been a legal and justified war, Americans would have paid a war tax without demur. As it is, it was criminal – as is he – and hopefully he will get his comeuppance. Would love to see him, Rice and Cheney hauled before the Hague.
Chris Jonsson May 21st, 2014 at 17:31
carowe, TiredOfThemAll was referring to a previous war and a previous administration when the things he mentioned happened. Saddam Hussein used to be our ally and we gave him biological weapons which he used on the Kurds.
We were supporting a war with the Soviets to save Afghanistan from take over. Saddam helped us.
Deacon Phreque May 21st, 2014 at 17:34
And Rumsfeld. And John Yoo.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:54
Have a problem with ridding the world of a dictator. Don’t want to make the world better? It was not a financial disaster. The troops still have to be paid. And all the troops have access to the va system.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:47
More harm than Hussien? Or do you like butchers? I talked with an Iraq Christian who was very grateful we came. Hussein was preparing to eliminate the centuries old christian community.
TiredOfThemAll May 21st, 2014 at 18:13
Now there are tons of Husseins.
From Shiite death squads, to garden variety jihadists.
I don’t know from where you get your information, but it is has been brutal for Christians since the war; (you know, Saddam’s spokesman, Tariq Aziz, was a Christian….. a Chaldean Catholic ..).
Meanwhile;
Christians have been slaughtered and their property seized since the war;
Yazidis in Iraq A tough time
http://www.economist.com/blogs/pomegranate/2013/11/yazidis-iraq
Exodus From North Signals Iraqi Christians’ Slow Decline
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/11/world/middleeast/exodus-from-north-signals-iraqi-christians-decline.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Christians in Iraq face liquidation
Mosul, the relentless slaughter of Iraqi Christians
Kurds Behind Violence Against Assyrians in Mosul
Iraq’s Endangered Minorities: Catholic Chaldean, Syriac Orthodox, Assyrian, Armenian and Protestant Christians; and smaller Yazidi and Mandean communities
Statement on KRG expansion plans [PDF] (04 April 2009)
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-07-21/news/0407210324_1_liquor-store-liquor-sales-islamic-law
A Haircut in Iraq Can Be the Death of the BarberBy ROBERT F. WORTH
Published: March 18, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/18/international/middleeast/18barber.html
* This webpage is dedicated to the slaughter of Iraqi Christians in the North of Iraq. Read more about the fate of Iraqi minorities: Several of Iraq’s minorities risk being wiped out as they face unprecedented levels of violence, according to a report by Minority Rights Group International. (27 Feb 2007)
Time time to worry about the butcher was BEFORE we armed him and propped him up.
jasperjava May 21st, 2014 at 19:22
“Hussein was preparing to eliminate the centuries old christian community.”
What a CROCK!
Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq for 25 years, and never touched the Christians. His number one deputy, Tariq Aziz, was a member of the Chaldean Christian community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariq_Aziz
It was only AFTER Dubya’s criminal invasion that the Christians suffered a backlash.
So much for your 4 degrees, you ignoramus. What kind of Z-grade college would have you as a student?
mea_mark May 21st, 2014 at 19:40
Lets not get too carried away with personal attacks. It is OK though to point out recurring flaws in logic and lack of facts.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 11:56
My statement is based on a primary source, not a secondary written by who know who? I interviewed someone who was there at the time and lived it. Wikipedia is not a valid research source due to it nature of how it is written..
RenStar May 21st, 2014 at 06:03
A total of 4,486 U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2012, and 32,223 wounded in action. Seriously your a FREAKIN IDIOT. Bush should have be brought up on Charges for this.
Chris Jonsson May 21st, 2014 at 17:22
That number doesn’t count the soldiers and others who were transferred to other countries and died there. That number is much too low.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:43
Charges, what are you smoking? He did nothing illegal. And Hillary and Obama both voted to go to war along with most the democratic party. Soldiers know they maybe called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice. You don’t hear them whining. They may grip but that is part of a soldier’s job. Getting rid of Hussein was worth it.
arc99 May 21st, 2014 at 17:54
Barack Obama did not vote for the war. Even if he had wanted to, which he did not, he was serving in the Illinois legislature, not the US Congress when the Iraq war vote was taken.
of the 258 Democrats serving in Congress (House and Senate combined) when the war vote was taken, 147 or more than half were opposed.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 19:17
He lied about WMD’s and it’s no secret. So please don’t insult people’s intelligence, for having 4 degrees as you say, you have zero common sense?
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 11:50
It’s only a lie if he knew for certain that there were no WMD. And intelligence does not offer that type of surety. They deal with probability not certainties.
RenStar May 21st, 2014 at 05:47
Not only did BUSH get us in all these Wars that some of my battle buddy’s died in…But he lied to us all about WMDs!!!!! Just so he can get his WAR on!!!!!SMH…
RenStar May 21st, 2014 at 05:45
Kevin either your on MEDs or your just in denial, with all you comments on here?
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:37
I just try to think and analyse for myself instead of following the herd. 17 years of university and 4 degrees Does that.
john Baldwin May 23rd, 2014 at 04:19
you’re, not ” your ” , just saying it changes the context of the meaning when the wrong words are used.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 08:54
Kevin, here’s a fact I want you to look up, it’s going to cost this country 1trillion dollars just to treat the vets from the Iraq and Afganistan wars, both were unfunded until Bush got out of office and Obama put them on the books and has been accused of raising the debt. He’s been blamed for debt that the Bush administration created.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:46
All vets have access to the VA system, not just the Iraq and Afghan vets. They would have been eligeable even without the war so that debt would exist anyway. I doubt those wounded and still needing help will cost a trillion dollars. Besides the VA has been the last resort medical system for decades. They would rather use their Aca. Since pre-existing conditions no longer apply. So maybe there is little need for the VA medical system and Obama can rob it to pay for his programs. Or better yet, spend the VA budget on free insurance plans for all vets. Reduce government overhead.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 19:14
You completely ignored what I said and I was pretty specific. I said from just the Iraq and Afganistan wars only. But hey if you choose to ignore facts who am I to judge? i do t make posts without facts because I don’t like to,look foolish. Maybe you should try it. I mean really look up the facts then post.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 19:15
Sorry for the type-os.
mea_mark May 21st, 2014 at 19:19
A troll look up facts and post. LOL
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 11:44
Iraq and Afghanistan vets are a small percentage of the users of the system. They were small police actions.and do not impact c t that greatly on the VA system.
Byron Williams May 23rd, 2014 at 15:25
I’ll say it one more time. The cost to care for the vets from the Iraq/Afganistan wars will cost 1 trillion dollars, the two unfunded wars that Bush started. Can’t make my point any clearer. We are on opposite sides on this, so I don’t expect you to see my side, but the statement about cost is fact!! Look it up if you want.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 19:03
And just what is that figure based on? A Wegee board? The number of wounded according to recent DoD stats is 5,000. How can any one determine what needs they will have over there life. What war has ever been funded?
Byron Williams May 23rd, 2014 at 19:08
I told you to look it up if you want, I’m just sharing information, if you choose to believe different, that’s your choice, not arguing with you, just sharing information that you yourself can look up, if you don’t,that’s your choice.
TiredOfThemAll May 23rd, 2014 at 19:19
And just what is that figure based on?
________
. The study finds that providing medical and disability benefits to vets will eventually cost over $836 billion.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/28/the-total-iraq-and-afghanistan-pricetag-over-4-trillion
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 20:57
That just refers to a Harvard study done by some academic. And the figure is 836 not a trillion. It doesn’t mean it is an accurate study and who knows what methodology was used to arrive at that figure. If you knew anything about research you would know that secondary sources are not reliable.
TiredOfThemAll May 23rd, 2014 at 21:06
That just refers to a Harvard study done by some academic. And the figure is 845 not a trillion.
______
1) I simply provided a number and the source.
2) $836 billion is just 200 B shy of a Trillion.
3) Where are YOUR numbers?
But read it for yourself;
https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/citation.aspx?PubId=8956&type=WPN
MR. RIGHT May 23rd, 2014 at 21:13
Don’t start with all that “facts” B.S.
Kevin knows more than you ever will, and he never needed facts before.
Besides, if those soldiers don’t have insurance, maybe they should think twice before liberating a country.
nitestik June 3rd, 2014 at 19:07
Did a Democrat “start” or “escalate” WWII? I think Germany and Japan did that, Bonehead. We incurred (in today’s dollars) $10.5 trillion in debt to win that war; and that’s why you don’t speak German or Japanese right now. We paid all but $1 trillion of that debt back through a progressive income tax code over the next 35 years, only to have Reagan and Bush quadruple that debt, and W to double it again, while trashing the economy in the process.
Paula Denmon May 26th, 2014 at 11:38
And the Republicans voted down efforts to expand VA hospitals and build 33 new clinics. Too expensive, even tho, they would create jobs for construction and medical staffing and the all important Veteran HEALTCARE.
bobzmcishl May 20th, 2014 at 20:24
Those “temporary” tax cuts and an unfunded war led to the biggest deficit run-up in our history, and they even managed to blame Obama for the ongoing costs of these two fiasco’s. The tea party types are the worst in their ignorance of how the deficits really came about.
1fullsailkid . May 20th, 2014 at 23:26
I love how they’re all flipping out about the care soldiers are getting at the VA now too. Like its Obama’s fault the VA is packed with Veterans that Bush put there.
Shawn Klaus May 20th, 2014 at 23:38
Not to mention the VA budget House rethuglicans cut to the point of forcing the situation. Just like Benghazi, and everything else they’ve done to this country for the last 13 years.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 02:53
VA is pack with WWII, Korean and Vietnam vets. Very few from Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars started under Dem. administrations. Dems seem to start or escalate the wars. Obama tried to get us into Libya and Sryia.
davidwachtel1 May 21st, 2014 at 03:22
Kevin- You have not responded to the fact that Bush started 2 unfunded wars that have cost tens and tens of thousands of deaths and put this nation into a horrible position, economically. Also, if Obama was like Bush we would be in both of those countries for a decade, off the books.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 04:07
So you wanted a war tax? And as far as WMD, we have now found that a neighbouring country has them. Iraq had previously used them. And yet you still harp on Bush for removing a butcher like Hussein?
davidwachtel1 May 21st, 2014 at 04:24
Absolutely have a war tax. We did not experience any sacrifice over these two wars (except for the G!s and their families). A war tax would force us to minimize the number of wars and make us ALL sacrifice. You are beating a dead dog-there were no WMDs and the Bush Administration knew it. They lied to us over and over-look at Powell at the UN and Rice on the mushroom cloud analogy, for a start. Finally, you seem to justify having these wars UNFUNDED and thus pass the expense on to the next president and generations.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 05:43
But did they lie about WMD? Where did Syria get theirs? From Hussein or make themselves. With the way the weapon inspectors got blocked, it was reasonable to think they were hiding something. At least this time we got rid of the regime that was oppressing so many. And as far as a war tax, might be a good excuse if the money actually went to the cost. But then you might try to bring a victory in under budget and end up killing even more people. Of course no liberal has ever tried paying for a war that they gotten us into except maybe FDR. And don’t think WW2 came in on budget.
OldLefty May 21st, 2014 at 06:01
But did they lie about WMD? Where did Syria get theirs?
_______
Of Course they did;
Just a few examples;
3/15/2002; British intel reports that there’s only “sporadic and patchy” evidence of Iraqi
WMD. “There is no intelligence on any [biological weapons] production facilities.”
May, 2002; Primary corroborator of Curveball’s claims
that Iraq has mobile weapons labs is judged a liar and Chalabi plant by DIA. A
fabricator warning is posted in US intelligence databases.
NYT publishes everything that Scooter Libby whispers in Judith Miller’s dear little ear, than Cheney cites the NYT as corroboration..
9/7/02 Bush
claims a new UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report states Iraq is
six months from developing a nuclear weapon. There is no such report.
9/8/02; Tubes
“are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs…we don’t want the
smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”—Rice on CNN
9/8/02 “We
do know, with absolute certainty, that he is using his procurement system to
acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear
weapon.”—Cheney on Meet the Press
9/19/02 Classified
UK memo notes there’s “no definitive intelligence that [the aluminum tubes
are] destined for a nuclear programme.”
9/23/02 Institute for Science and
International Security releases report calling the aluminum- tube intelligence
ambiguous and warning that “U.S. nuclear experts who dissent from the
Administration’s position are expected to remain silent.
We set set up these regimes that oppress so many, then take them down, when they no longer suit us, which causes more suffering for so many, resulting in the kind of chaos the causes even more suffering.
Syria got their weapons from Russia, but seriously, if Saddam had them, and he knew they were coming for him, why would he give them away?
That’s like having guns, and sending them away as somebody is breaking into your house.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:15
So there was some evidence, you admit. Enough to indicate that there might be something there. After Clinton devastated the human intelligence side of things, information became harder to confirm.
arc99 May 21st, 2014 at 18:28
so blame President Clinton for mistakes that happened on President Bush’s watch. while at the same time you condemn President Obama for not taking responsibility. typical right wing hypocrisy.
OldLefty May 21st, 2014 at 18:52
There was nothing there.
Here is the one, and the only reason they wanted to go into Iraq;
Let’s all go to the yard sale; Iraq’s Economic
Liberalisation.
The Economist Sept. 2003
“If it all works out, Iraq will be a capitalist’s dream
If carried through, the measures will
represent the kind of wish-list that foreign investors and donor agencies dream of for developing markets. Investors in any field, except for all-important oil production and refining, would be allowed 100% ownership of Iraqi assets, full
repatriation of profits, and equal legal standing with local firms. Foreign banks would be welcome to set up shop immediately, or buy into Iraqi ventures.”
http://www.economist.com/node/2092719
carowe May 21st, 2014 at 09:29
They lied about WMD. Iraq does not equal Syria. Quit salivating over FOX and learn some actual facts.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:13
Try reading something other than Huffington and CNN. They were mistaken about the WMD. It was a reasonable mistake. Since when have liberals cared bout facts, beyond a headline.
Molly NYC May 21st, 2014 at 09:49
YES, the Republican administration lied about the WMDs.
God, you’re naive.
Also, you have a lousy memory. When Saddam saw Bush/Cheney was serious about going to war, he stopped blocking the weapons inspectors and let them see everything they wanted. Every military installation, every nook, every cranny.
About two weeks before the inspectors said they’d be done, the Republicans–who had at that point been beating the war drum for at least seven months–suddenly needed to invade right that week. Big emergency.
They didn’t want the inspectors to finish for the same reason Saddam initially didn’t want them to start: They would have shown that Iraq didn’t have WMDs.
As for “the regime that was oppressing so many”–WE are the ones who got literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed and hundreds of thousands of them maimed. WE are the ones who turned two and a half MILLION Iraqis into refugees.
Even Saddam’s record wasn’t that bad–and he was a psychopath.
And as far as paying for the war goes, it didn’t happen because the Republicans didn’t care. It was was a total non-issue to them, because the war was driven by the same thing that drove everything else in the last administration: making government into a conduit between the GOP’s donors and the US Treasury and credit lines (and other assets belonging to the American people).
There is simply nothing they did for eight years straight, no matter how outwardly incompetent, ill-advised or insane, that didn’t make perfect sense in the light of a goal to enrich their clients at the expense of the American people.
Our Republican brethren complain about the budget now (even though the Republican-created deficit has been cut by half under the Obama Administration). But as they didn’t complain about it during their administration, there’s no reason to take them seriously now.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:09
We didn’t turn anyone into refugees. Iraqis got themselves killed by supporting a racist dictator. They had an opportunity to get rid of him, but Bush Sr. Blew their chance. Many Iraqis welcomed American and British involvement and liberation.I thought you liberals liked fighting against racist?
jasperjava May 21st, 2014 at 19:24
“I thought you liberals liked fighting against racist?”
Why do you think you’re getting all this opposition?
We can’t stand stupidity and ignorance, and it galls me that people who are so misinformed can vote.
Ted Govostis May 22nd, 2014 at 07:27
Bush Sr. didn’t “blow his chance”. He knew that as horrible as Hussein was, the sectarian violence that would follow afterwards was worse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
mea_mark May 22nd, 2014 at 09:03
Liberals fight racism. There is a distinct difference between racism and a racist. Liberals in general don’t like to fight anybody. We would like to enlighten people to a more progressed evolved point of view. It would be nice if we could banish racism to the dustbin of history. War and fighting should not be liked by anyone, it is a primitive way of resolving issues.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 12:29
Unfortunately, some people count that view as a weakness. Opening g the people up for attack. The communist frequently America was to weak to defend it self. There , are many primitives still in the world.
The liberals liberals then to encourage racism, by their policies. If conservatives did some of the same would be strung up.everyone needs to be held to the same standard. That is the only way to have true racial equality.
OldLefty May 23rd, 2014 at 12:44
The liberals liberals then to encourage racism, by their policies. If conservatives did some of the same would be strung up.everyone ne
________
Thou dost project too much, Methinks.
mea_mark May 24th, 2014 at 08:42
Projecting idiocy that is for sure. Sometimes I’m not sure what he is trying to say, or even if he knows, what he is trying to say.
Molly NYC May 31st, 2014 at 11:54
Kevin: Sadly, people like you have established that what you self-described “conservatives” like is whatever Fox News, Rush et al. tell you that liberals oppose, and vice versa.
What self-described “conservatives” don’t like is taking responsibility for their own actions–including pretending that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis we killed all committed suicide.
Kevin Stall June 1st, 2014 at 18:22
Sorry to disappoint you but not everyone watches Fox news. Though it has to be better than the other three. I use to watch all three major networks and never watched fox.
Actually, conservatives tend to take responsibility for their actions. They expect everyone to, instead of blaming others. If the “refugees” would work to make their country better, the problems would better. Yet they prefer to take the easy way and flee their countries. Things tend to improve after with the US. We rebuild them, hire thousands and raise the living standard. At the end of second world war, we didn’t cut Nazis any slack for supporting Hitler. Should we do different for the Iraqis? Particularly when the people killing our troops are not in uniform or in a recognized national army. UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW the should be executed.
OldLefty June 1st, 2014 at 18:41
“Actually, conservatives tend to take responsibility for their actions”
_______
No they don’t.
Conservatives tend to blame the poor, the blacks, the browns, that gays and women.
Those who ran the policies in Iraq have no idea who the “Iraqis” were.
Kevin Stall June 2nd, 2014 at 04:36
It’s liberals who blame the conservatives for everything. George Bush caused all this to happen.
Liberals give excuses to the different groups. Doesn’t hold everyone to the same standards. Look how you treat the black members of the tea party? Or Sarah Palin. The governor of Louisiana. All these are conservative, from your underdog group. Working for all the people.
Liberal racism is the worse type, worse than the clan. You think that on an equal playing field, they are held back. But yet you have people like Allen west who has made something of himself without special treatment. Something given isn’t as valuable as something earned. A education that is achieved despite poor conditions is a better one than one that is received in optimum conditions. Assuming that they can’t achieve unless given special treatment is racist of the worse type. At least with the clan, you know they are ignorant.
OldLefty June 2nd, 2014 at 07:06
It’s liberals who blame the conservatives for everything.
______
So, you think they are taking a page from the GOP’s ‘blame Clinton and liberals for everything’??
The point is you have have to back it up. We can show a direct proportionality between the policies of Reagan, including the conservative policies of Clinton, and the economic decline of the middle class in America.
“Look how you treat the black members of the tea party…..?????
Are you kidding?
Compared to how YOU treat the corresponding liberals?
When these people say false and stupid things that are meant only to pander to the base and appeal to the corporate welfare queens, they SHOULD be called out on it.
That is how calling out racism is the new racism.
More accurately;
CONSERVATIVE racism is the worse type, worse than the Klan. You FEAR that on an equal playing field, they will compete.
That is why you need to keep the opportunities exclusive.
People like Clarence Thomas benefitted greatly from Affirmative Action, then pulled the ladder up.
Allen West???
He disgraced himself in the military, and then disgraced himself as an elected official. He is now someone who will spout off any inanity for no other reason than as click bait and to rile up a small niche.
” Assuming that they can’t achieve unless given special treatment is racist of the worse type.” … This attitude along with the constant reference to the ‘Democratic plantation’, shows that you don’t even seem to realize that you are saying these groups of people are too stupid or ignorant to know with whom their best interests lie.
Molly NYC June 2nd, 2014 at 12:57
No. You self-described “conservatives” never take responsibility for what happens on your watch.
And when you talk about responsibility–which you do a lot–all you ever say is that it’s someone else’s.
___
Oh, and “UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW” (as you put it)–Bush, Cheney and about half their cabinet should be on trial at the Hague.
jasperjava May 21st, 2014 at 19:26
“no liberal has ever tried paying for a war that they gotten us into except maybe FDR. And don’t think WW2 came in on budget.”
Sounds like you’re upset that we defeated Hitler. It figures.
OldLefty May 21st, 2014 at 05:19
No, they did not have them. They had other wmd that they got from Russia.
And when Iraq had previously used them, (after we sold them to him and propped him up), we did nothing.
And we caused more harm in the region, including delivering Iraq to Iran, than anything, just to pursue a PNAC plan from 1999.
carowe May 21st, 2014 at 09:28
convenient twisting of facts to support your rightwad dipshittery. Iraq was no threat to the U.S. Bushstink took us to war because he’s a brainless little boy who had his lace panties in a wad over his own dad’s near miss, and he was ready to use any excuse to plunge us into a financially devastating war that he then tried to hide from the accountants and couldn’t be bothered to pay for with a war tax – which he should have levied. His rethugturd cohorts would have found the honesty of that too much to swallow. If it had been a legal and justified war, Americans would have paid a war tax without demur. As it is, it was criminal – as is he – and hopefully he will get his comeuppance. Would love to see him, Rice and Cheney hauled before the Hague.
Chris Jonsson May 21st, 2014 at 17:31
carowe, TiredOfThemAll was referring to a previous war and a previous administration when the things he mentioned happened. Saddam Hussein used to be our ally and we gave him biological weapons which he used on the Kurds.
We were supporting a war with the Soviets to save Afghanistan from take over. Saddam helped us.
Deacon Phreque May 21st, 2014 at 17:34
And Rumsfeld. And John Yoo.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:54
Have a problem with ridding the world of a dictator. Don’t want to make the world better? It was not a financial disaster. The troops still have to be paid. And all the troops have access to the va system.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:47
More harm than Hussien? Or do you like butchers? I talked with an Iraq Christian who was very grateful we came. Hussein was preparing to eliminate the centuries old christian community.
OldLefty May 21st, 2014 at 18:13
Now there are tons of Husseins.
From Shiite death squads, to garden variety jihadists.
I don’t know from where you get your information, but it is has been brutal for Christians since the war; (you know, Saddam’s spokesman, Tariq Aziz, was a Christian….. a Chaldean Catholic ..).
Meanwhile;
Christians have been slaughtered and their property seized since the war;
Yazidis in Iraq A tough time
http://www.economist.com/blogs/pomegranate/2013/11/yazidis-iraq
Exodus From North Signals Iraqi Christians’ Slow Decline
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/11/world/middleeast/exodus-from-north-signals-iraqi-christians-decline.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Christians in Iraq face liquidation
Mosul, the relentless slaughter of Iraqi Christians
Kurds Behind Violence Against Assyrians in Mosul
Iraq’s Endangered Minorities: Catholic Chaldean, Syriac Orthodox, Assyrian, Armenian and Protestant Christians; and smaller Yazidi and Mandean communities
Statement on KRG expansion plans [PDF] (04 April 2009)
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-07-21/news/0407210324_1_liquor-store-liquor-sales-islamic-law
A Haircut in Iraq Can Be the Death of the BarberBy ROBERT F. WORTH
Published: March 18, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/18/international/middleeast/18barber.html
* This webpage is dedicated to the slaughter of Iraqi Christians in the North of Iraq. Read more about the fate of Iraqi minorities: Several of Iraq’s minorities risk being wiped out as they face unprecedented levels of violence, according to a report by Minority Rights Group International. (27 Feb 2007)
Time time to worry about the butcher was BEFORE we armed him and propped him up.
jasperjava May 21st, 2014 at 19:22
“Hussein was preparing to eliminate the centuries old christian community.”
What a CROCK!
Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq for 25 years, and never touched the Christians. His number one deputy, Tariq Aziz, was a member of the Chaldean Christian community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariq_Aziz
It was only AFTER Dubya’s criminal invasion that the Christians suffered a backlash.
So much for your 4 degrees. What kind of Z-grade college would have you as a student?
mea_mark May 21st, 2014 at 19:40
Lets not get too carried away with personal attacks. It is OK though to point out recurring flaws in logic and lack of facts.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 11:56
My statement is based on a primary source, not a secondary written by who know who? I interviewed someone who was there at the time and lived it. Wikipedia is not a valid research source due to it nature of how it is written..
RenStar May 21st, 2014 at 06:03
A total of 4,486 U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2012, and 32,223 wounded in action. Seriously your a FREAKIN IDIOT. Bush should have be brought up on Charges for this.
Chris Jonsson May 21st, 2014 at 17:22
That number doesn’t count the soldiers and others who were transferred to other countries and died there. That number is much too low.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:43
Charges, what are you smoking? He did nothing illegal. And Hillary and Obama both voted to go to war along with most the democratic party. Soldiers know they maybe called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice. You don’t hear them whining. They may grip but that is part of a soldier’s job. Getting rid of Hussein was worth it.
arc99 May 21st, 2014 at 17:54
Barack Obama did not vote for the war. Even if he had wanted to, which he did not, he was serving in the Illinois legislature, not the US Congress when the Iraq war vote was taken.
of the 258 Democrats serving in Congress (House and Senate combined) when the war vote was taken, 147 or more than half were opposed.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 19:17
He lied about WMD’s and it’s no secret. So please don’t insult people’s intelligence, for having 4 degrees as you say, you have zero common sense?
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 11:50
It’s only a lie if he knew for certain that there were no WMD. And intelligence does not offer that type of surety. They deal with probability not certainties.
RenStar May 21st, 2014 at 05:47
Not only did BUSH get us in all these Wars that some of my battle buddy’s died in…But he lied to us all about WMDs!!!!! Just so he can get his WAR on!!!!!SMH…
RenStar May 21st, 2014 at 05:45
Kevin either your on MEDs or your just in denial, with all you comments on here?
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 17:37
I just try to think and analyse for myself instead of following the herd. 17 years of university and 4 degrees Does that.
john Baldwin May 23rd, 2014 at 04:19
you’re, not ” your ” , just saying it changes the context of the meaning when the wrong words are used.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 08:54
Kevin, here’s a fact I want you to look up, it’s going to cost this country 1trillion dollars just to treat the vets from the Iraq and Afganistan wars, both were unfunded until Bush got out of office and Obama put them on the books and has been accused of raising the debt. He’s been blamed for debt that the Bush administration created.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:46
All vets have access to the VA system, not just the Iraq and Afghan vets. They would have been eligeable even without the war so that debt would exist anyway. I doubt those wounded and still needing help will cost a trillion dollars. Besides the VA has been the last resort medical system for decades. They would rather use their Aca. Since pre-existing conditions no longer apply. So maybe there is little need for the VA medical system and Obama can rob it to pay for his programs. Or better yet, spend the VA budget on free insurance plans for all vets. Reduce government overhead.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 19:14
You completely ignored what I said and I was pretty specific. I said from just the Iraq and Afganistan wars only. But hey if you choose to ignore facts who am I to judge? i do t make posts without facts because I don’t like to,look foolish. Maybe you should try it. I mean really look up the facts then post.
Byron Williams May 21st, 2014 at 19:15
Sorry for the type-os.
mea_mark May 21st, 2014 at 19:19
A troll look up facts and post. LOL
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 11:44
Iraq and Afghanistan vets are a small percentage of the users of the system. They were small police actions.and do not impact c t that greatly on the VA system.
Byron Williams May 23rd, 2014 at 15:25
I’ll say it one more time. The cost to care for the vets from the Iraq/Afganistan wars will cost 1 trillion dollars, the two unfunded wars that Bush started. Can’t make my point any clearer. We are on opposite sides on this, so I don’t expect you to see my side, but the statement about cost is fact!! Look it up if you want.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 19:03
And just what is that figure based on? A Wegee board? The number of wounded according to recent DoD stats is 5,000. How can any one determine what needs they will have over there life. What war has ever been funded?
Byron Williams May 23rd, 2014 at 19:08
I told you to look it up if you want, I’m just sharing information, if you choose to believe different, that’s your choice, not arguing with you, just sharing information that you yourself can look up, if you don’t,that’s your choice.
OldLefty May 23rd, 2014 at 19:19
And just what is that figure based on?
________
. The study finds that providing medical and disability benefits to vets will eventually cost over $836 billion.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/28/the-total-iraq-and-afghanistan-pricetag-over-4-trillion
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 20:57
That just refers to a Harvard study done by some academic. And the figure is 836 not a trillion. It doesn’t mean it is an accurate study and who knows what methodology was used to arrive at that figure. If you knew anything about research you would know that secondary sources are not reliable.
OldLefty May 23rd, 2014 at 21:06
That just refers to a Harvard study done by some academic. And the figure is 845 not a trillion.
______
1) I simply provided a number and the source.
2) $836 billion is just 200 B shy of a Trillion.
3) Where are YOUR numbers?
But read it for yourself;
https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/citation.aspx?PubId=8956&type=WPN
MR. RIGHT May 23rd, 2014 at 21:13
Don’t start with all that “facts” B.S.
Kevin knows more than you ever will, and he never needed facts before.
Besides, if those soldiers don’t have insurance, maybe they should think twice before liberating a country.
nitestik June 3rd, 2014 at 19:07
Did a Democrat “start” or “escalate” WWII? I think Germany and Japan did that, Bonehead. We incurred (in today’s dollars) $10.5 trillion in debt to win that war; and that’s why you don’t speak German or Japanese right now. We paid all but $1 trillion of that debt back through a progressive income tax code over the next 35 years, only to have Reagan and Bush quadruple that debt, and W to double it again, while trashing the economy in the process.
Paula Denmon May 26th, 2014 at 11:38
And the Republicans voted down efforts to expand VA hospitals and build 33 new clinics. Too expensive, even tho, they would create jobs for construction and medical staffing and the all important Veteran HEALTCARE.
yanni54 May 20th, 2014 at 23:21
No you, a$$holes you didn’t do anything to the President YOU F-CKED OVER YOUR OWN COUNTRY, THAT IS WHAT ALL OF YOU IDIOTS ON THE RIGHT JUST DOESN’T SEEM TO GET!!!!!!! When 2016 comes and goes the Presient will do what Bush did, he will salute and leave and who does this fool think will be left with what they did to this country, THE DAMN AMERICAN PEOPLE! So it feels pretty good to him, well God don’t like ugly and I hope you will get it in the end you POS!
LooseHead May 21st, 2014 at 00:10
Did you go hoarse screaming at your computer screen?
yanni54 May 20th, 2014 at 23:21
No you, a$$holes you didn’t do anything to the President YOU F-CKED OVER YOUR OWN COUNTRY, THAT IS WHAT ALL OF YOU IDIOTS ON THE RIGHT JUST DOESN’T SEEM TO GET!!!!!!! When 2016 comes and goes the Presient will do what Bush did, he will salute and leave and who does this fool think will be left with what they did to this country, THE DAMN AMERICAN PEOPLE! So it feels pretty good to him, well God don’t like ugly and I hope you will get it in the end you POS!
LooseHead May 21st, 2014 at 00:10
Did you go hoarse screaming at your computer screen?
James May 20th, 2014 at 23:25
TRAPPED OBAMA AND SCREWED AMERICANS
James May 20th, 2014 at 23:25
TRAPPED OBAMA AND SCREWED AMERICANS
sfwm.son May 20th, 2014 at 23:42
Just disgusting.
sfwm.son May 20th, 2014 at 23:42
Just disgusting.
Obewon May 21st, 2014 at 00:56
The Joke’s on GOP Oligarchs who since 2013 must “pay an additional 0.9% in Medicare taxes” unlimited & totaling +2.35% in Medicare taxes on 100% of annual net income above $200,000 forever! That’s why the GOP shutdown government pleading to delay the ACA’s $1.5 T deficit reducing ObamaCare:) http://www.adp.com/tools-and-resources/adp-research-institute/insights/insight-item-detail.aspx?id=2DA70D0E-A5DF-4C73-BEC9-9FFAB890CEEE
And Repubs still fume –wondering why GOP has no path to the presidency after losing 5 of the past 6 popular POTUS votes, the Electoral College 2:1 365-173 via Mc’Palin’s 47% and 3:2 332-206 per Mitt’s 47%.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 02:49
You can always cut taxes. It is the raising of taxes which is a negative.
The shutdown was on the Dems. They agreed to have the automatic cuts. They choose to make them as painful as possible.
Obewon May 21st, 2014 at 06:43
Really? FNC & everyone says “GOP Government Shutdown Was Planned For Months By Ed Meese, Koch Bros!” http://radio.foxnews.com/2013/10/06/government-shutdown-was-planned-for-months-by-ed-meese-koch-bros/
Then after Ted Cruz blew $22 billion to read Green eggs & tea party Spam tanking GOPtp to record lows these oligarch orders ended the Cruz shutdown: Boehner Abruptly Changes Strategy Following Outcry From Koch Brothers And Heritage. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/10/10/2762451/boehner-adopts-heritage-koch-plan/
Rich Gardner May 21st, 2014 at 07:55
Incorrect. Republicans agreed to a shutdown because they wanted to hurt the American people as much as possible. Democrats thought that it would cause so much pain and damage that no responsible political party could ever stand to see it implemented. They weren’t counting on the Republicans being utter nihilists.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:35
Then why did Obama make it as painful as possible? Was there a reason to close the mall? Or the WW 2 memorial? The local cops patrol there, trash is a contract that wasn’t affected. Previous shutdowns didn’t go as far as Obama choose to. Even Jimmy Carter’s shutdown was more reasonable. But of course Jimmy wasn’t trying to hurt the people and blame the republican s.
Rich Gardner May 21st, 2014 at 22:57
Well, first off, there was a shut-down in 1995 that was quite as painful as the 2013 one was, the lack of social media back then meant that opponents couldn’t make as big a stink about it to the public. The shut-down was painful to a very wide variety of other people then and in 2013, the difference being that ham and damage to regular people via getting their payments cut off was nowhere near as photogenic as were angry veterans not being able to visit monuments. Republicans were quick to get themselves in front of cameras helping veterans because it was good PR for them. Other harm and damage, such as scientific research being disrupted and hospitals having to turn away patients, “Eh, tough luck!”
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 12:16
Think about it,, why would the republicans want to hurt the American people? So they wouldn’t vote for them? Here’s your sign.
Kathryn May 22nd, 2014 at 04:37
Kevin, you are not only wrong, you are as completely wrong as it is possible to be. There is not one thought you expressed that has even an iota of truth.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 12:13
Only in your version of reality or truth. It was a shell game by both sides. The propaganda is mainly what you are remembering, not what actually happened or how it was
Handled in the past. Obama made it as painful as possible. Just to try to put the blame on ReP but both sides lost in the opinion polls. Yes the ReP were blamed more but. Obama could have ended it from the beginning. He did part of what congress wanted anyway. Stopped the employer mandate.
Obewon May 21st, 2014 at 00:56
The Joke’s on GOP Oligarchs who since 2013 must “pay an additional 0.9% in Medicare taxes” unlimited & totaling +2.35% in Medicare taxes on 100% of annual net income above $200,000 forever! That’s why the GOP shutdown government pleading to delay the ACA’s $1.5 T deficit reducing ObamaCare:) http://www.adp.com/tools-and-resources/adp-research-institute/insights/insight-item-detail.aspx?id=2DA70D0E-A5DF-4C73-BEC9-9FFAB890CEEE
And Repubs still fume –wondering why GOP has no path to the presidency after losing 5 of the past 6 popular POTUS votes, the Electoral College 2:1 365-173 via Mc’Palin’s 47% and 3:2 332-206 per Mitt’s 47%.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 02:49
You can always cut taxes. It is the raising of taxes which is a negative.
The shutdown was on the Dems. They agreed to have the automatic cuts. They choose to make them as painful as possible.
Obewon May 21st, 2014 at 06:43
Really? FNC & everyone says “GOP Government Shutdown Was Planned For Months By Ed Meese, Koch Bros!” http://radio.foxnews.com/2013/10/06/government-shutdown-was-planned-for-months-by-ed-meese-koch-bros/
Then after Ted Cruz blew $24 billion to read Green eggs & tea party Spam tanking GOPtp to record lows these oligarch orders ended the Cruz shutdown: Boehner Abruptly Changes Strategy Following Outcry From Koch Brothers And Heritage. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/10/10/2762451/boehner-adopts-heritage-koch-plan/
Rich Gardner May 21st, 2014 at 07:55
Incorrect. Republicans agreed to a shutdown because they wanted to hurt the American people as much as possible. Democrats thought that it would cause so much pain and damage that no responsible political party could ever stand to see it implemented. They weren’t counting on the Republicans being utter nihilists.
Kevin Stall May 21st, 2014 at 18:35
Then why did Obama make it as painful as possible? Was there a reason to close the mall? Or the WW 2 memorial? The local cops patrol there, trash is a contract that wasn’t affected. Previous shutdowns didn’t go as far as Obama choose to. Even Jimmy Carter’s shutdown was more reasonable. But of course Jimmy wasn’t trying to hurt the people and blame the republican s.
Rich Gardner May 21st, 2014 at 22:57
Well, first off, there was a shut-down in 1995 that was quite as painful as the 2013 one was, the lack of social media back then meant that opponents couldn’t make as big a stink about it to the public. The shut-down was painful to a very wide variety of other people then and in 2013, the difference being that ham and damage to regular people via getting their payments cut off was nowhere near as photogenic as were angry veterans not being able to visit monuments. Republicans were quick to get themselves in front of cameras helping veterans because it was good PR for them. Other harm and damage, such as scientific research being disrupted and hospitals having to turn away patients, “Eh, tough luck!”
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 12:16
Think about it,, why would the republicans want to hurt the American people? So they wouldn’t vote for them? Here’s your sign.
Kathryn May 22nd, 2014 at 04:37
Kevin, you are not only wrong, you are as completely wrong as it is possible to be. There is not one thought you expressed that has even an iota of truth.
Kevin Stall May 23rd, 2014 at 12:13
Only in your version of reality or truth. It was a shell game by both sides. The propaganda is mainly what you are remembering, not what actually happened or how it was
Handled in the past. Obama made it as painful as possible. Just to try to put the blame on ReP but both sides lost in the opinion polls. Yes the ReP were blamed more but. Obama could have ended it from the beginning. He did part of what congress wanted anyway. Stopped the employer mandate.
mechadave May 21st, 2014 at 08:29
Well I’m sure that arsonists, vandals and rapists also feel good about their accomplishments.
mechadave May 21st, 2014 at 08:29
Well I’m sure that arsonists, vandals and rapists also feel good about their accomplishments.