Selective Fiscal Conservatism & Blaming it on Mother Nature ...
There is a selective memory lapse in Punditom when discussing how exactly we're going to pay for $200 billion in recovery funds for the devastated Gulf region while already saddled with a $330 billion budget deficit that is significantly linked to bloated "mega-government" military, homeland security and war pork spending. (And Republicans always pimp frugality over excess. Irony? No - more like hypocrisy). That misplaced imperialistic quagmire of an irresponsible foray simply known as "Iraq" seems to have fallen off the radar screen, considering its cost us $200 billion plus ...
Something to think about reading today's Financial Times:
"Fiscal experts are losing count of the number of supplemental appropriation bills needed to fund the conflict in Iraq. A recent report by the government's chief investigator said even the Pentagon was struggling to keep track of the funds being spent."
That's comforting ...
So, when Republicans start talking about spending cuts (and Democrats pretty much cower at the thought), recommendations range from repealing $24 billion from the pork-laden transportation bill to completely cutting the Moon-Mars mission (how forward thinking is that ye math-less, anti-scientific, iPod wearing frontierless groupies convinced the Solar System rotates around Earth) to slashing the prescription drug benefit (as if that was doing anything in the first place).
Yet, little is said about maybe, just maybe, considering a smartly mapped withdrawal from Iraq. In fact, the headlines are transfixed on the current hurricane season; we watch talking heads and policy wonks quick to place the onus of our deteriorating fiscal situation on Katrina, offering budgetary amnesty to Bush Administration officials who may welcome the post-Katrina focus as an opportunity to deflect attention from Iraq. Few, especially on the right, want to admit that war actually drains an economy, particularly since its a question of resources that could have been better spent. Instead, blame our impending economic woes on the hurricanes - great political distraction technique for an arrogant and hawkish political establishment that refuses to see how pointless its become.
Something to think about reading today's Financial Times:
"Fiscal experts are losing count of the number of supplemental appropriation bills needed to fund the conflict in Iraq. A recent report by the government's chief investigator said even the Pentagon was struggling to keep track of the funds being spent."
That's comforting ...
So, when Republicans start talking about spending cuts (and Democrats pretty much cower at the thought), recommendations range from repealing $24 billion from the pork-laden transportation bill to completely cutting the Moon-Mars mission (how forward thinking is that ye math-less, anti-scientific, iPod wearing frontierless groupies convinced the Solar System rotates around Earth) to slashing the prescription drug benefit (as if that was doing anything in the first place).
Yet, little is said about maybe, just maybe, considering a smartly mapped withdrawal from Iraq. In fact, the headlines are transfixed on the current hurricane season; we watch talking heads and policy wonks quick to place the onus of our deteriorating fiscal situation on Katrina, offering budgetary amnesty to Bush Administration officials who may welcome the post-Katrina focus as an opportunity to deflect attention from Iraq. Few, especially on the right, want to admit that war actually drains an economy, particularly since its a question of resources that could have been better spent. Instead, blame our impending economic woes on the hurricanes - great political distraction technique for an arrogant and hawkish political establishment that refuses to see how pointless its become.
posted by BPblogger at 11:56 AM
<< Home