Barry told us earlier in the week, when describing how tough he was to subsist on hotel food for eighteen months, that because he'd gone up against Hilary Clinton in the primaries, that he was experienced.
And apparently he's learned from Hil-Rod, who once claimed to have inquired about joining the Marines in her youth (I hear you laughing out there. C'mon, she was serious! Honest!). The Messiah told George Steph today that he thought about joining the military in his youth.
(This is also the same interview where he talked about his "Muslim faith." Way to stop those secret Muslim rumors, Barry. I'm waiting for the inevitable blaming of the campaign staffer.)
I'd make a joke about the Clintons teaching him how to break his political opponents legs, like his surrogates have tried to do to Governor Palin, but he is tied up with those savery Chicago characters like Tony Rezko, Saddam's cousin, the Ayers-Dorhn clan, and the cast of thousands that is his church. He didn't need the Clintons to learn how to be a legbreaker.
Showing posts with label Military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Military. Show all posts
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
A Minor Bone To Pick
Rep. Whiplash says that Iraq is ruining the economy. Psychologically, maybe, but what do the numbers say?
The US Gross Domestic Product in 2007 was 13,843,825,000,000 (not a typo-that really is almost fourteen trillion dollars), ranking first in the world. By the same token, the only economy that can compare to the US is the combined European Union, when all 27 members are added together. Japan's GDP is $4.3 trillion; Germany third at $3.3 trillion; China fourth at $3.2; and Britain fifth at $2.7. That's right: Our economy is bigger than the next four on the list (they check in at $13.5 combined).
(Supposedly poor Mexico, due to its trade partnership with the US and Canada-ninth largest-checks in at 15th. They are directly behind Australia and South Korea, and ahead of the Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Poland, Norway, Taiwan, Oil-Rich Saudi Arabia, Austria, Greece, Denmark, Ireland, and Israel.)
The federal budget is $3.1 trillion dollars. Our defense budget is roughly 3.7% of our GDP. As Wiki notes, this is more than France (2.6) but much less than Saudi Arabia (10). Overall, defense spending has gone up .7 (that's seven-tenths of one percent) as a percentage of GDP, from a post-WWII low of 3% in 1999-01 (who was president then? I forget). Iraq cost $170 billion last year; as a comparison, $237 billion was spent on public debt. I'm sure the $48 billion in earmarks requested by your co-workers last year could also be used more constructively than, say, a Woodstock Museum.
And of course, I know the trillions of dollars in spending that your party's presidential candidate proposed today you stridently oppose.
It seems to me the bigger issue would be balancing the federal budget, and reigning in public spending if we really wanted to free up cash "to invest in sources of alternative energy, job growth, and economic development," as opposed to something that's a miniscule part of the total spending of our federal government.
But you knew all this, right? I'm sure you've got all the answers ready. After all, it can't be you simply playing up to the isolationist streak in rural North Mississippi, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
The US Gross Domestic Product in 2007 was 13,843,825,000,000 (not a typo-that really is almost fourteen trillion dollars), ranking first in the world. By the same token, the only economy that can compare to the US is the combined European Union, when all 27 members are added together. Japan's GDP is $4.3 trillion; Germany third at $3.3 trillion; China fourth at $3.2; and Britain fifth at $2.7. That's right: Our economy is bigger than the next four on the list (they check in at $13.5 combined).
(Supposedly poor Mexico, due to its trade partnership with the US and Canada-ninth largest-checks in at 15th. They are directly behind Australia and South Korea, and ahead of the Netherlands, Sweden, Belgium, Poland, Norway, Taiwan, Oil-Rich Saudi Arabia, Austria, Greece, Denmark, Ireland, and Israel.)
The federal budget is $3.1 trillion dollars. Our defense budget is roughly 3.7% of our GDP. As Wiki notes, this is more than France (2.6) but much less than Saudi Arabia (10). Overall, defense spending has gone up .7 (that's seven-tenths of one percent) as a percentage of GDP, from a post-WWII low of 3% in 1999-01 (who was president then? I forget). Iraq cost $170 billion last year; as a comparison, $237 billion was spent on public debt. I'm sure the $48 billion in earmarks requested by your co-workers last year could also be used more constructively than, say, a Woodstock Museum.
And of course, I know the trillions of dollars in spending that your party's presidential candidate proposed today you stridently oppose.
It seems to me the bigger issue would be balancing the federal budget, and reigning in public spending if we really wanted to free up cash "to invest in sources of alternative energy, job growth, and economic development," as opposed to something that's a miniscule part of the total spending of our federal government.
But you knew all this, right? I'm sure you've got all the answers ready. After all, it can't be you simply playing up to the isolationist streak in rural North Mississippi, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
I Give It A...Ten! A Ten! A F&%#ing Ten!
Number ten comes in today, with Virginia's Junior Senator, former Secretary of the Navy, author, proud Scots-Irishman, and guy who once said he'd like to "punch out" the President, James Webb, stating that Senator McCain needs to 'calm down' his rhetoric on Iraq, saying he implies that the military agrees with his views on issues because he was a military man.
Much like the "100 years of war" non-comment, this is Webb pulling things out of the aether, as McCain has never said such, and of course, it's attempt number ten to criticize McCain's service, though just a little more gently (surprising, coming from a hothead like Webb). Naturally, the argument rings false, since Webb ran on his military record in Viet Nam, his time as NavSec, and his son being in Iraq, when running against George Allen in 2006 (or, perhaps people need a reminder of his Webb-given name, Felix W. Macacawitz).
A review: Military service, ok, when a Democrat is running (Webb, Kerry, etc); bad and dangerous when a Republican is running.
Much like the "100 years of war" non-comment, this is Webb pulling things out of the aether, as McCain has never said such, and of course, it's attempt number ten to criticize McCain's service, though just a little more gently (surprising, coming from a hothead like Webb). Naturally, the argument rings false, since Webb ran on his military record in Viet Nam, his time as NavSec, and his son being in Iraq, when running against George Allen in 2006 (or, perhaps people need a reminder of his Webb-given name, Felix W. Macacawitz).
A review: Military service, ok, when a Democrat is running (Webb, Kerry, etc); bad and dangerous when a Republican is running.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
