Was Kerry's $87 billion bill a better deal for the troops?
It's obvious that lives of our soldiers are now at risk because they aren't getting what they need to fight a war. No one will be surprised when we receive a huge balloon payment notice for the war right after the election. Is it possible that a funding bill that had a revenue source, through the rollback of tax cuts, might have gotten supplies to our soldiers sooner?
to pay for the post deployment of our military. Stuff that should have already been included. Still, to this day, not all Americans are sharing the burden of these wars. Vietnam started out like this. I'm telling kids at work to get ready to get an M-16. One kid said that he had Attention Deficit Disorder and the military won't take him. I asked if he could shoot a rifle. Another young man said that he's got a friend in Iraq with ADD.
4. Why would your question affect the way ChimpCo* chose to
disburse the funds - i.e. to their friends and favorite companies? These gluttons were and are more interested in filling their pockets. No amount of tax rollback is likely to stop them other than removing them from office and seriously changing the course of this abysmal policy of theirs.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
