Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: goldworldnet who wrote (215921)	8/17/2007 2:39:26 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793991

I have often wondered if the people who give Bush fits for spending so much, would care to look at which expenditures of major consequence they would wish to take out....? --Spending on the aftermath of 9-11? to the families of 9-11? to the help for NYC to clean up the debris? Should we have not spent anything here? --Katrina. Should we have spent anything here? If so, how much? --To the safeguarding the US from the terrorism that is rampant everywhere, and dictated by THEIR own words....should we not have done any preventative anything in this regard? --Should we not be sending hospital ships, food and water, etc to countries that have natural disasters? i.e. Peru in the recent earthquake? Indonesia and the tsunami? etc. --How many refugees have been signed into the country by Executive Order? We pay for them to get started from the first day they arrive. Should we be doing this? ETC ETC ETC NOT one person of National standing and recognition who is opposed to the high spending, is ready and able to talk about what SHOULD NOT have been spent.... I'm sure there are some things....but what exactly are they, in a multiTRILLION dollar budget....?