The costs of GWB's war of choice have been very much in the news in the last 24 hours. The illumination came with a CBO estimate that to date, the cost for Iraq alone is estimated at about $1.3 trillion, more than double the appropriated moneys to fund it. Of course, the CBO recognizes as 'costs' little things like continuing veterans' care, equipment replacement, etc.
When you throw in Afghanistan, the CBO pegs the costs at about $1.6 trillion... so far! As usual, this has become a Dem talking point, and rightly or wrongly, it is and will be one more in the arsenal of clubs with which to bring this administration to account... do ya think?
The fact is, the costs have been known for quite some time to exceed the funding requests by the administration by a factor of even more than two. But, in the Congress (House and Senate), when there is committee action, or debate (seldom, in a true sense), or a vote on funding for the war(s), there is never an acknowledge of the total costs, only what must be borrowed today to keep the war(s) perpetuated into an indeterminate number of tomorrows.
Can you believe for a moment, that even though Schumer and other Democrats are using the latest CBO report as a series of political points, the costs are a complete surprise? Schumer, Reid, Maloney, Hoyer, and doubtless others, decry the cost... yet is it plausible that none of them knew that the true costs of these wars were confined to only the annual 'supplementals', that they were absolutely ignorant that there would be future costs, that is, 'accrued costs', for each and every dollar appropriated and spent in a particular year?
I hate to be blunt, but this leads me to one of two conclusions:
(1) Schumer, Reid, Maloney, Hoyer, and others of our elected politicians are absolutely too stupid to understand even the most basic aspects of accounting, and therefore, should have absolutely nothing to do with budget matters (recusal would be in order?), or,
(2) Schumer, Reid, Maloney, Hoyer, and others of our elected politicians are so absolutely disingenuous as to believe that the electorate is going to accept this feigned sudden outrage at this 'sudden' realization that the war(s) cost more than advertised.
Frankly, I think (2) is the case... what about you? Yes, they are not stupid, only a bit disingenuous when it serves political purposes. But, of course, it is you and I and our children who will pay the bills... along with vets... as the lobbyists continue to pay theirs into PACs and campaigns. And somehow, I cannot ever forget that it is Schumer, Reid, Maloney, Hoyer, and a host of others who have voted, over and over again, to continue funding this very travesty that should be rightfully GWB's alone... except they have more than once bought into it... shareholders, you might say.
OMO. Cheers.