The Obama administration is claiming that their budget is an honest budget because they have included war funding in the budget and the Bush Administration didn’t.
I agree that the Bush administration was less than truthful with the American people when it layed out it’s budget totals because war spending was not included in the totals.
The Obama is set to announce that it will withdrawal more than half of the U.S. troops in Iraq over the next 19 months. Thus, the reason why war funding was included was to make it appear that the budget deficit is going down in future years. Spending in Iraq is expected to decline each of the next four years.
Why do I think that the move was political and not just an honest attempt at being more honest?
Because of two main reasons beyond the reason I just mentioned.
The numbers of war spending in Afghanistan is very rosey, much like the Bush numbers were. Afghanistan is going to be much more difficult than Iraq. The powerful Soviet Army went bankrupt and was forced to withdrawal. The Chinese, the British and even Alexander the Great all failed to tame Afghanistan. We will be there for at least 15 years.
And the biggest reason why the Obama plan is also dishonest is because it does not include funding for Government owned Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Fannie and Freddie lost $60 Billion dollars last year. That is $60 Billion dollars down the toilet.
That is $169.4 Millon Dollars a Day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
$169.4 Million every single day going down a black hole.
And the amount of Government money going to Frannie and Freddie is expected to increase each of the next 6 years. Thus, the appearance of Obama budget deficit cuts would be ruined if Fannie and Freddie were included in the budget totals- as they should be.
The Obama budget is just as dishonest, if not more so, than Bush’s budget was.
I agree
The Obama
Why do I think
Becau
The numbe
And the bigge
That is $169.4 Millo
$
And the amoun
The Obama
