...but not the War on Poverty?
If only they were as result-oriented in the War on Poverty we would have abolished Social Security, welfare, food stamps and the like ages ago! Because theres more poverty than ever before, with trillions of dollars spent and no end in sight. Talk about a REAL quagmire!
All they do is complain: "moore troops" or "not enough troops", depending on what suits them at the time. They act all indignent when Osama isn't caught immediately or Al Queda isn't destroyed in a week's time. They get disgruntled when strategy needs to be adjusted.
But for the War on Poverty, they seem to have a wellspring of never-ending support; no cost is too high; no program is too inept; no funding should ever be curtailed; and new approaches are always welcomed, never criticizing the old failed ones. Because for liberals, I guess, the appearence of "fighting" poverty is far more important than actually defeating it.
What utter hypocrisy!
2007-03-08
04:37:12
·
12 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics