I thought Bush was a conservative, and I thought conservatives were for smaller government. He hasn't vetoed one bill since he's been president. We haven't seen spending like this in 30 years. What the f***!
http://www.independent.org/tii/content/press_rel/press_040624.html
Sparrowhawk
07-07-04, 01:56 PM
-Terrorist -acts of 911, and not increase you’re spending. -
-Besides -that, - having to make-up the military needs that were at the lowest level during the Clinton years has been costly.
Have you forgotten how our troops were so poorly supplied and lacking basic necessary defensive equipment, during the Clinton years?
Most of their equipment and parts for their supporting aircraft, trucks, and other needed equipment was not there, they had to be replenished, and more produced in order to just meet our basic military needs. The biggest cost to our defense has been making up for the equipment we didn't have before 9-11.
Security for our the nation has been costly, we have new security measures at our airport, police training, and a new Homeland Security Department has been set up. Now can you tell me, how can we do that without increasing our spending?
Can you imagine what it would be under Gore, he would still be wiping his butt from where he would have spoiled his pants, because of 9-11. Not once has Gore mentioned that he would have done anything less than Bush has, neither had Clinton or any other US Senator. Nor has any of them, come out with saying what they would do that is more in protecting our nation. Not one idea, or even effort in that direction. Instead of helping, they have prevented, interfered with our security measures and in protecting our armed forces overseas. Now, that has cost us, as a divided nation, like Kerry is encouraging, only helps to encourage our enemies.
Or maybe your right, Gore still wouldn't have made a decision as to what to do. Neither he nor Kerry have said, they would have done more, but what Kerry has said, that he would have responded by leading a peaceful marching against middle east terrorism.
At that he is good at, and that may have not cost us any money, it would have cost us American lives, but would not have increased our spending.
LMAO
HardJedi
07-07-04, 02:28 PM
really get a charge out of just trying to rile people up, don't ya Eddie?
Sparrowhawk
I remember the Republicans being on the same page when it came to cutting back on the military during the Clinton years. Remember that the Cold War was over and hardly anyone was concerned about terrorism up in DC. It was a bipartisan effort that weakened our military. So Bush is fixing a problem that his party had a hand in helping to create. As for the terrorist threat, that was created by the CIA.