Posted on 02/26/2008 12:23:25 PM PST by sagmanagain
Liberal activist groups MoveOn.org, USAction, Americans United for Change, VoteVets, and the Service Employees International Union, along with former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and his wife, joined forces Monday to announce a $20-million public awareness and lobbying campaign to promote a perceived link between the war in Iraq and a weakening U.S. economy. "This campaign will raise awareness of the unseen costs of Bush's singular focus on the war in Iraq and his failure to focus on strengthening the American economy, schools, health care and real security, and use the political energy and outrage that the campaign generates to drive Congress to end the war and to get out the anti-war vote," said a written statement released by the campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Can we arm them and ship them to Iraq and Afghanistan now?
“MoveOn, Liberals, and Edwards Unite to End Iraq War”
So, are they volunteering to take the place of US soldiers? If so I am 100% for it.
Treasonous commie pr!cks all.
sweet, let them piss away $20 million.
If these people really wanted to help downtrodden people, couldn’t they find a better use of that $20 million? At least Chavez sends heating oil. /s
How about looking at the link between the greenies demand for ethanol from corn and the rising prices of food? Too complex for them too understand? Of course.
when's the little bugger due?
Jeez, isn’t there some better use for that $20 million?
(s)Like save some foreclosures, create jobs, help the destitute?(/s)
During his VP run Edwards talked about the little girl who couldn’t get $5 for a second-hand coat.
If my math is correct, he could use that $20,000,000 to buy a coat for 4,000,000 little girls.
Given the ignorance of the American public, they may be very effective with this. They will be convinced that, but for the “war” in Iraq, they could all be getting stuff.
What, if anything, will our presumptive candidate, our side, do to counter this PR campaign?
Who are you calling smart?
I’m all in favor of giving them non-refundable one-way tickets to Iraq as well. Tell them it’s a fact-finding mission.
Land them in Mosul and tell them it’s Baghdad, and give them little Iraqi flags to wave, but with the Arabic “Allah Akbar” in it replaced with “Eat Pork”.
That’s a good question for the newbie. I didn’t see anyone in the article I’d call “smart.”
Please! Have mercy on us here! :-)
Abstract: Considering the post-Vietnam period from 1978-2003, this paper investigates whether military spending improves or worsens the economic well-being of citizens within the 50 American states. We test two competing perspectives that predict opposite effects of military spending on economic well-being. The military displacement perspective suggests that military spending competes with and displaces more beneficial private investment and causes adverse effects on the economy. On the other hand, the military Keynesianism argument suggests that state managers uses military spending as a countercyclical tool to reduce the deleterious effects of economic downturns and that its effects on the economy are generally positive. Using state-level, longitudinal data we find support for the military Keynesianism argument. Several implications of these findings are discussed.
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/2/0/4/p102041_index.html
They mihgt as well sit in a circle and sing hippie songs. It would do just as much “good”, and makes about as much sense.
What I’ve noticed about some people involved in ‘non-profit’ and various public campaigns is that it never really is about improving the society or making the ACTUAL difference in someone’s life.
It’s just another lifestyle choice and a way to find stable employment AND assume an air of moral superiority and belonging to an anointed class of the ‘concerned.’
At least Bill Gates attempts to teach the youth about finance and economics in some of his charity but I find that it would just be simpler to go out and buy someone a damn coat, rather than talk about how we need to steal money from people at the point of the govt gun in order to provide that same coat.
SF has spent, what, 56 billion on ‘homelessness’ in the last several years. They could have just banked that entire amount and given the vagrants/transients and addicts accounts where they could draw on the interest—just enough to live but not so much to give them huge houses which they’d just waste. But enough to get them on their feet.
But if they did that, they couldn’t play out their silly social narrative and make-believe games (and dole out patronage to this or that ‘insider’ in the non-profit ‘game.’)
Sure the war costs American taxpayers money. So did the wrecking by terrorists of the NYC Trade Center and the Pentagon, plus 3000+ lives of those at these places.
Wars and attacks cost money and lives, but losing wars also costs money and lives. Are we going to let Islamic terrorists come here and kill us? Are we going to cut and run from this war as we can’t take the costs?
We seem to have enough money for Obama and Hillary to promise more government run health care - or is the promised health care at the expense of suffering more attacks from Islamic terrorists?
Oh we are in such trouble as a country.
Hillary was once on the board of Wal-Mart. Great cartoon.
lol! Hope things are going well for you there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.