http://costofwar.com/
I would rather have my tax money go to helping children and the elderly not war and destruction of a country.
2006-08-08 05:15:57 · 10 answers · asked by david c 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
they are bankrupting this country
2006-08-08 05:24:03 · answer #1 · answered by idontkno 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why do liberals always act as if we're not already doing more to help the impoverished of the world than the next ten countries combined?
Of course, I'm sure you also don't consider giving a child in Iraq the opportunity to live a free and unoppressed life with their families to be helping them. Because in your twisted little mind I'm sure they would have been better served to live under that maniac Sadam Hussein as an orphan, which is how many children over there grew up.
2006-08-08 12:22:36 · answer #2 · answered by baldninja2004 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's just it, mental midget, when it's a government program, very little of it goes to helping children and the elderly - it gets sucked up in overhead, misuse, corruption - the government rarely maintains any decent programs that actually do any good. Liberals love programs though - because even though they don't do anything, liberals can tell themselves that they are helping the poor and less fortunate. All they are doing is helping some democrat bureaucrat make house payments in the Virginia suburbs - the poor and elderly see very little of that tax money... but as long as it helps democrats get elected, it's all good in their eyes, because liberals don't care about results, just about staying in power...
2006-08-08 12:54:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not against social programs. I am against the abuse of social programs and wish that there was more done to eliminate the abuse.
War is sometimes a necessary evil. War isn't cheap but then if we are in a war don't we want to have the best advantages to win it?
2006-08-08 12:27:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Government funded social programs are not constitutional. That's good enough for me.
If you think they are, how come I've never seen a reference to them?
No, General Welfare refers to things that are good for (nearly) everyone, such a roads, hospitals, research into cures for disease. Not for putting a roof over the head of someone too lazy to do it for themselves.
2006-08-08 12:28:50 · answer #5 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So would we all, but the radical muslims want us to think their way or die. What is your choice?
Would you like to see your Mom (or girlfriend, if you are male), or would you like to walk around all day wearing a burka? Would you want to see TV of your leader all day and night as opposed to entertainment? You obviously like the internet - how about China - where their internet choices are limited to what the government allows?
2006-08-08 12:29:23 · answer #6 · answered by TheHumbleOne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who says Conservative are against social programs. We just want to be able to choose which ones we wish to support.
2006-08-08 12:21:46 · answer #7 · answered by Ethan M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd rather make the world better than give a bum free money to spend on liqour.
2006-08-08 12:23:10 · answer #8 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sometimes war is necessary. this would be like telling you 'instead of wasting billions on WW2, we could have paid for 5 million ethiopian kids!'
2006-08-08 12:20:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you are right. i guess yo have spoken to every conservative in the world and they all hate all social programs.
2006-08-08 12:27:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋