In Case.. part 2..

September 8, 2011 § Leave a comment

As expected I received a tirade from suspects anonymous, this by way of response..

They said: whaddya mean!?—explain yerself man.!!

Me… mean? Nay, tis explain thyself the clear need.. so here goes.. h/t G-news for the Fiscal Times link.. first the kicker, followed by a most succinct game-changer with bonus points.. (in blue of course)

The decision to launch a wider War on Terror, which included the claim that Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, harbored hidden Al-Qaeda cells and was building weapons of mass destruction (WMD), entailed huge social and economic costs…

The unleashing of the U.S. military abroad also triggered a tidal wave of funding for the traditional military-industrial complex. Before 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had promised a leaner, meaner war fighting machine, with fewer soldiers bearing better high-tech weapons at less cost. That vision was quickly replaced with the biggest build-up of military hardware since the 1980s as the Pentagon’s budget more than doubled to nearly $700 billion – about as much as it spends on Social Security – in less than a decade.

The expansive overseas war on terror was coupled with its domestic equivalent – an explosion in domestic spending on anti-terror activities. It included beefed up federal bureaucracies to protect home land security; massive spending on contractors to provide services ranging from protecting computers from hackers to protecting ports from smugglers to protecting air travelers from hijackers. It also included, at least for a time, hefty grants to state and local governments for first responders in local police and fire departments, which was doled out, as federal grants often are, to every Congressional district in the country with only passing regard to the ones most likely to face a terrorist threat.

The final and more enduring cost of the War on Terror was the decision to put the entire enterprise on the national credit card. Not only did the Bush administration and Republican Congress reject raising taxes to pay for the new war spending, it pushed for and won huge tax breaks for the well-to-do and the middle-class. The Bush administration even had its own version of guns-and-butter, successfully giving Medicare beneficiaries an unfunded drug benefit that helped cement his re-election victory in 2004.

Heard that final point before, haven’t we all?

As for the above we can fairly say that the brand of Republican et als to have inherited President Clinton’s surplus is an excellent illustration of how modern America both indulges and enjoys hurting itself. As well as others, let’s say non-americans including those resident past and present at gitmo. Thus inviting our tiradears to consider just who are “the wronguns.”

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading In Case.. part 2.. at 2ftom.


%d bloggers like this: