Quote:
Originally Posted by Laker14
You don't know what point I'm trying to make because I haven't made the point yet. I've just asked a question, which nobody is willing to answer. I don't remember 87Billion being discussed. I could be wrong but I seem to remember more along the lines of 250Billion being discussed, and laughed at as an unrealistically optimistic figure, and I do remember GW Bush saying something like "whatever it takes" which means, unlike the stimulus package it was essentially a blank check, which has yet to be filled out.
So again, the question, should somebody like to answer a simple yes or no question, with no attempt to justify,
"at that time, when we were preparing for, and undertaking this war, at whatever the projected costs were, at any time, did those who purport to be 'fiscal conservatives' ever publicly make the argument that we should pay as we go rather than pay for the war with deficit spending, in order to keep us from 'mortgaging our children's futures'?"
|
My answer would be NO. Not only the fiscal conservatives but I do not recall the Democrats, etc saying much although I know there was some debate.
Having said that, whatever the point is that you will make, to me anyway is irrelevent as that situation was considered a matter of national defense.
NOW...we have passed an enormous stimulus bill that was not even read by the congress (actually on the vote for Iraq, they KNEW what they were voting on) AND...in addition by the Presidents own admission about 40% of that "stimulus bill" was what is commonly referred to as pork and social programs from the years prior that was not passable because of the make up of the congress.
So, make your point...am very interested in what it might be !