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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pompsander who wrote (8459)	3/5/2009 6:22:31 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 103300

well that beats Obama's plan which is give me all your assets and wages and I'll give you bad health care.

To: pompsander who wrote (8459)	3/6/2009 3:59:38 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Report: McConnell fudged Obama spending claim March 05, 2009 Categories: Senate Democrats politico.com Remember Mitch McConnell's claim, made at the CPAC that "In just one month, the Democrats have spent more than President Bush spent in seven years on the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan and Hurricane Katrina combined"? It's "false," according to PolitiFact.com. The Minority Leader's office disputes their report, which registered the lowest possible mark on the non-partisan watchdog's "Truth-o-Meter." [T]he lowest estimate of Bush's war spending through 2008 that is even remotely defensible is $808 billion. Tack that onto the $132 billion cost of Katrina and you get $940 billion for the wars and Katrina. That's well over the expenditures expected from the Democrats' stimulus and children's health insurance bills, which total $686 billion once tax cuts are subtracted. Even if we included the cost of the tax cuts (for a total of $818 billion), he would still be wrong because that's less than the $940 billion that uses a more accurate cost of the war spending. And even that analysis, remember, is generous to McConnell since it includes several years of spending from the stimulus and S-CHIP bills, not "one month." McConnell's claim stands up only if you treat tax cuts as spending, accept an incomplete estimate of the wars' costs and group several years of planned spending into a one-month spending spree by the Democrats -- but not for Bush. That is, it doesn't stand up at all. We find this claim False. A McConnell spokesman says the PolitiFact reporter reached out to the senator's staff, but ignored key counter-arguments. McConnell's staff defends their math, saying that "Democrats and the media" have been counting tax cuts in overall tallies of spending for years. In addition, they maintain that McConnell actually maximized estimates of Bush administration expenditures -- including counting clean-up and rebuilding costs associated with a string of recent hurricanes and not merely Katrina, and producing an Afghanistan funding number larger than some estimates.