Who's The Bigger Threat to National Security?

Oo! Oo! Me, Pick Me! My hand’s up first!

*sigh*

Lets watch this story disappear too.

The gay guy got it in the end
[Bad joke, even worse truth.]

We have laws on the books all over the place.
.
There’s “law on the books” illegal and then there’s the “you have been convicted… you are going to jail” version.
.
Look at the hoops Scott Bloch jumped through to keep from going to jail vs. the ones he didn’t jump through when it looked like he would get away with NO jail time.
.
When Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) calls some of these people into his office and FIRES them for NOT doing anything to prosecute, when there are FINALLY some high-visibility convictions with stiff jail terms for even the well-connected, THEN you’ll see this being treated seriously.
.
Otherwise, it’s just another act in a very bad play… KABUKI, if you will… just to give the “rubes” out here in “fly-over territory” the illusion that there’s a rule of law that applies equally to EVERYONE.

Let’s face it… the entire procurement process is virtually out-of-control and more than just slightly corrupt.
.
I have little faith in their being able to develop specific guidelines to pass on to the services that would enable them to find and prosecute the obvious (to us, anyway) examples of fraud, without lawyers from the companies being investigated being able to find legal loopholes large enough to put an aircraft carrier through.
.
Given that no one has been executed for “war profiteering” in a very long time (if ever), there’s not a whole lot of “personal” risk involved for them either.

Who’s The Bigger Threat to National Security?

.
Glad you asked. I say Obama. He is bankrupting our country to the tune of over 685 BILLION with a B per year by 2018 for the interest on the debt alone. More debt than we have ever seen in our nation’s history ever before.
.
Now what is more critical here Thompson, over 685 billion each and every year just in interest alone or 175 billion over three months?
.
Hmmm
.

* The Obama deficit legacy, moreover, will be felt well beyond his tenure in office, especially if that tenure extends beyond a single term. First, Obama’s spending through 2012 essentially doesn’t include Obama-care. The CBO projects that Obama-care will increase spending by more than $2 trillion in the overhaul’s real first decade (2014 to 2023). That’s more than $2 trillion that could -otherwise be used to pay down the debt, rather than allowing the debt to rise continually and then piling a massive new entitlement program on top of it.
.
Second, President Obama’s gargantuan deficit spending will hamstring future efforts to make ends meet. Under Obama’s own projections, interest payments on the debt are on course to triple from 2010 (his first budgetary year) to 2018, climbing from $196 billion to $685 billion annually. Under his projections for 2018, interest payments on the debt will exceed all defense spending, including wartime spending. Think about that: In the first budgetary year after the next presidential term, our creditors are projected to get more money than our military.

.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/historic-flood-red-ink_550425.html
.
Yes, who IS the biggest threat to our overall National Security, indeed?

I would mention two wars and a giant recession, but I’ll defer to your intellectual superiority….

So many words to say ‘I hate liberals and will go to any length to make that sh1t up’. See. Much shorter and without the need for made up math.

We won’t mention that those wars were “off-budget” for 8 years. Think that the fact that they’re now “on the books” MIGHT have a little to do with the size of the deficit increase?
.
Real problem is that the financial and employment “benefits” of those little “clam-bakes” is keeping the country from being even worse off economically.
.
Who knew that “killing and being killed on foreign soil” could be so good for us?

Yes, yes, yes. Bush II is guilty guilty guilty for 2 unfunded wars and the Medicare Part D (which I might remind my fellow liberal nay-sayers that most if not all Democrats voted for enthusiastically), but how do you justify and continue to justify what is going on now?
.
Bush II had a budget deficit leaving office of approximately 8 trillion. Now it is ready to hit what 14 Trillion in less than 2 years? Do we hear 15 Trillion by the end of this year?
.
How long is this type of spending going to last? How much longer can we afford to spend the money we are on just the interest alone?
.
These are the questions which we are ALL facing today. You have the choice. Allow Obama and Bernake to devalue our dollars in order to bring it back some, or to quit all of the spending. It truly is that simple.

Bush II had a budget deficit leaving office of approximately 8 trillion. Now it is ready to hit what 14 Trillion in less than 2 years?
.
Hence the deficit issue with placing those two wars “on the books” that Bush did not.
.
Simply by removing THAT little “accounting” trick, the deficit’s gonna rise dramatically. WIthout doing ANYTHING different.
.
George just hid the costs for 8 years, set the “temporary” tax reductions to “sunset” AFTER he left office… leaving his successor to deal with any repercussions…
.
A paragon of financial and political courage, that one..

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/any-questions/

Bush II had a budget deficit leaving office of approximately 8 trillion

Again you prove yourself to be an unadulterated liar and an idiot rustyblogwhore. The debt as of 1/31/2009 was $10.6 trillion plus the $1.84 trillion deficit left over from W’s last budget (though some of that figure may be credited to Obama). As such, the debt was approximately $12 trillion from the Bush years. I suppose you must have “overlooked” that miscellaneous $4 trillion.
..
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/2009/opds012009.pdf
..
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/business/economy/12budget.html

I always like to go to this graph, especially when those like ladydiecash like to spin the numbers.
.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/
.
The Bush II debt, public debt was just over 6 trillion as a matter of fact. Unfunded liabilities from entitlement programs, (yes those Democrat entitlement programs) amounted to another 4 trillion, thus ladydiecash’s figure of 10 trillion.
.
But, ladydiecash fails to explain away the near 15 trillion we are currently or about to become in debt. Isn’t that right ladydiecash. Where did that 5 trillion come from? Mars?

I guess this is Bush’s fault too.
.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/02/Welfare-Spendathon-House-Stimulus-Bill-Will-Cost-Taxpayers-787-Billion-in-New-Welfare-Spending
.
The recently passed U.S. House of Representatives stimulus bill contains $816 billion in new spending and tax cuts. Of this sum, $264 billion (32 percent) is new means-tested welfare spending. This represents about $6,700 in new welfare spending for every poor person in the U.S.
.
But this welfare spending is only the tip of the iceberg. The bill sets in motion another $523 billion in new welfare spending that is hidden by budgetary gimmicks. If the bill is enacted, the total 10-year extra welfare cost is likely to be $787 billion.
.
The claim that Congress is temporarily increasing welfare spending for Keynesian purposes (to spark the economy by boosting consumer spending) is a red herring. The real goal is to get “the camel’s nose under the tent” for a massive permanent expansion of the welfare state.
.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/03/The-Obama-Budget-Spending-Taxes-and-Doubling-the-National-Debt#_ftnref4
.
The Obama Budget: Spending, Taxes, and Doubling the National Debt
.
During his presidential campaign, President Barack Obama promised the American people a “net spending cut.”1 Instead, he signed a “stimulus” bill that spends $800 billion, and he has proposed a budget that would:
.
Increase spending by $1 trillion over the next decade;
.
Include an additional $250 billion placeholder for another financial bailout;
.
Likely lead to a 12 percent increase in discretionary spending;
.
Permanently expand the federal government by nearly 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over pre-recession levels;
.
Raise taxes on all Americans by $1.4 trillion over the next decade;
.
Raise taxes for 3.2 million taxpayers by an average of $300,000 over the next decade;
.
Call for a pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) law despite offering a budget that would violate it by $3.4 trillion;
.
Assume a rosy economic scenario that few economists anticipate;
.
Leave permanent deficits averaging $600 billion even after the economy recovers; and
.
Double the publicly held national debt to over $15 trillion ($12.5 trillion after inflation).2
.
Yea, Obama is totally innocent in all of this. Yea right.

Actually it’s the sociopathic owners of multi-national corporations – especially oil companies and defense contractors – who now control the government and public policy of the United States, along with all of the lobbyists, public media and “conservative” politicians and judges who enable their treason.
.
It wasn’t a trick question, was it?

You are so utterly stupid. $10.6 trillion (debt 1/09) + (a large portion of) $1.84 trillion (W’s FY 09 budget deficit) = $12.44 trillion which I rounded down to $12 trillion. That was the approximate total of the debt after W.
..
The current debt = $14.24 trillion.
..
$14.24 trillion – $12.44 trillion = $1.8 trillion plus a portion of FY 09 budget deficit. Thus the debt has gone up by somewhat more than $2 trillion under Obama thus far.
..
Have no fear rustyblogwhore because I’m quite certain you’ll remain an idiot even after being spoon-fed the math.

I guess this is Bush’s fault too.
.
Which part? The spending itself… or for creating the economic conditions that made it necessary to do it?
.
Neither of the above? Both of the above?