Posts
The Tax Day Tea Party, here in Tulsa, went pretty well. It was encouraging to see so many other Tulsans taking time out of their day to speak out against the uncontrolled spending in Congress.
There was only one protester to our protest that I noticed. He held up a sign which displayed a chart of the President's 2009 budget. The point he was trying to make, I think, is that Obama is still spending 58% of the national budget on the military, while much lower percentages of the budget are going to various other areas (which he felt were more improtant), such as health care, education, etc.
I wish I could have taken the time to inform him that the problem with the budget isn't the amount he is spending on the military, it is the amount he spending on all of the other pieces that are unnecessary (but he was heckling and there was a Sheriff standing near him and I didn't want to upset him and cause problems). The primary purpose of the federal government is national security. Our Military spending should be at least 50% of our budget at all times. It is the social projects and educational system that need to be removed from the budget all together, as these are better handled by local government and individuals.
Oh, there I go again, talking like a rightwing extremist.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'm on travel, with a very slow internet connection, so I can't check it out easily, but . . . the amount "58%" on military seems awfully high. What is the real amount?
According to National Priorities, 58% was the amount provided to the military in Obama's proposed discretionary budget, FY 2009.
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/node/6916
But there is a note that I missed before (sneaky, sneaky):
Note that this chart includes the war-related spending requested by the administration as supplemental to the regular budget proposal.
Post a Comment