Thursday, March 16, 2006
There's more than $100B figure to object to in the AP article:
The bulk of the bill, $67.6 billion, would pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It would boost to nearly $400 billion the total spent on the conflicts and operations against terrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
First off, I have to wonder about the $400B figure. My guess would be that the administration's claims about Iraq spending are the mirror image of their claims about Gulf Coast Reconstruction spending--any Iraq spending that could possibly be counted as other spending is, any other spending that could possibly counted as Gulf Coast Reconstruction spending is. More importantly, the reporter refers to the number as money spent on the conflicts and operations against terrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Is she on the White House payroll?
The bulk of the bill, $67.6 billion, would pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It would boost to nearly $400 billion the total spent on the conflicts and operations against terrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
First off, I have to wonder about the $400B figure. My guess would be that the administration's claims about Iraq spending are the mirror image of their claims about Gulf Coast Reconstruction spending--any Iraq spending that could possibly be counted as other spending is, any other spending that could possibly counted as Gulf Coast Reconstruction spending is. More importantly, the reporter refers to the number as money spent on the conflicts and operations against terrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Is she on the White House payroll?
Comments:
<< Home
While we're on the subject, any idea about Comin' up three boys? in If I Should Fall From Grace With God? I found one way who say it's about doing down for the third time (drowing), which is consistent with the other verses, but that's not what it says. Again, see other post for details on my plans for intense research into these areas.
Post a Comment
<< Home
