“Spend more money!” vs. “Don’t spend more money!”

By Zach W On December 21, 2009 · 9 Comments · In Hypocrisy, The Cheddarsphere, Those Kooky Conservatives!

In a recent blog entry, fringe-right blogger Amy Geiger-Hemmer does a great job of illustrating the hypocrisy of the right when it comes to government spending. In her entry, Geiger-Hemmer calls more more government spending right before she calls for less government spending, noting the four best gifts this “Holiday” season that the American people could receive from Obama would include:

1) Cutting taxes! – the economy would immediately start to right itself.>
2) Scrap the socialist health care bill and start over.
3) Send the number of troops to Afghanistan that General McChrystal originally asked for in order to really get the job done and win!
4) Stop spending money we don’t have

So let’s recap:

Amy Geiger-Hemmer wants President Obama to send more troops to Afghanistan, which will result in increased spending in Afghanistan, while at the same time she wants the government to stop spending money we don’t have.

So here’s an idea: if Amy Geiger-Hemmer really wants the government to stop spending money it doesn’t have, then how about the government stop spending between 2 and 6 billion dollars a month for the war in Afghanistan? In August 2009, when 63,000 troops were deployed there, U.S. military spending in Afghanistan totaled $5.4 billion, after a record $6.7 billion in June. Military spending in Afghanistan in fiscal year 2008 averaged roughly $2 billion per month, so depending on troop levels, our nation is spending between $24 and 60 billion per year in Afghanistan.

If Amy Geiger-Hemmer really wants the government to stop spending money it doesn’t have, then perhaps she should show a little consistency and support reduced spending in Afghanistan. For that matter, she should support decreased military spending in general, given the fact that military spending accounts for roughly 20% of our government’s spending.

Tagged with: Amy Geiger-Hemmer

opinions powered by SendLove.to

9 Responses to “Spend more money!” vs. “Don’t spend more money!”

capper says:

December 21, 2009 at 7:36 am

Geiger-Hammer Shorter:

It’s OK to spend tax dollars on killing poor people, it’s not OK to spend tax dollars on helping poor people.
0 likes

Reply
- Zach W says:
  
  December 21, 2009 at 7:50 pm
  
  Spot-on, capper.
  0 likes
  
  Reply
grumps says:

December 21, 2009 at 11:46 am

Her writing shows a very real dearth of causal understanding. She posits two or three arguments that are in opposition to one another and then demands that all MUST be accomplished at once. It’s not even so much hypocrisy as it is poor critical thinking.
0 likes

Reply
- Zach W says:
  
  December 21, 2009 at 7:48 pm
  
  Yeah, you’re probably right; it seems to be more of a critical thinking problem.
  0 likes
  
  Reply
forgotmyscreenname says:

December 21, 2009 at 2:26 pm

Zach, it’s interesting you single out military spending, which is one of the three duties specifically charged to the federal goverment to carry out. You say it is 20% — what about the other 80%?! Don’t you think national security is an important priority? Now I will agree that it should be as cost-effective and streamlined as possible, but why do you single this out when most of the rest of government spending is merely income transfers.

As for spending money we don’t have, you complain about $2 billion a month while Democrats pass TRILLIONS in stimulus and other programs. How much is that per month?
0 likes

Reply
- Zach W says:
  
  December 21, 2009 at 7:49 pm
  
  forgot, how many Republicans voted for stimulus spending?
  
  For that matter, how many earmarks totaling how many billions of dollars have been inserted into various pieces of legislation by Republicans in Congress?
  
  Democrats aren’t alone when it comes to government spending.
  0 likes
  
  Reply
forgotmyscreenname says:

December 21, 2009 at 11:08 pm

You’re right, both sides have been guilty of unresponsible spending. But voting for stimulus spending and passing it are two different things. Last time I checked Democrats control both houses of Congress and therefore set the agenda, and President Obama has veto power. They are the ones sinking the ship right now. Not one Republican idea or earmark is going to pass without Democrat say-so.
0 likes

Reply
- Zach W says:
  
  December 22, 2009 at 6:01 pm
  
  How much did Republicans spend while they had majorities in Congress as well as a Republican president? The last time I checked, Republicans weren’t exactly the epitome of fiscal responsibility when they were in charge of things, so by your logic they’re no better than Democrats.
  0 likes
  
  Reply
  - forgotmyscreenname says:
    
    December 23, 2009 at 12:15 am
    
    Well if you read my above post I say both sides have been guilty of that. You seemed to think GW Bush was this big conservative, but he did not reign in spending when it came to the bloated ag bill or that new prescription drug benefit. But that is beside the point for the current argument.
    
    You bring up history to deflect the point that Democrats are in charge NOW and spending so much more. It’s no longer billions, it’s trillions. Yes, wars are expensive and it is legitimate to use it as one factor in the arguments to continue or fold. But my point was that you single that one expense out, but don’t recommend any cuts in domestic spending or suggest that the stimulus spent too much in the wrong areas, or that we should put on hold an expensive new government health program, or cap and trade…
    0 likes
    
    Reply