Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Is there any principled reason to exclude the costs of (a) Iraq, (b) Afghanistan, (c) AMT changes, (d) etc. from his budget? No. The only reason it was done was to make the deficit look smaller. If some thing is done solely to create an incorrect impression, it is fair to call it misleading. The fact that the press sometimes picks up on this does not change it. The Administration does it because the stories will revolve around its description.
|
Concur. Wait a few months, once the campaign kicks into high gear, and the discussions on budget/fiscal issues will be boiled down to a few sound bites that are bandied about as though the overall number captures the entire story.
That the administration came out and said today that the billions for Iraq, etc are expressly not included in the budget will be long forgotten, and that's a driving reason why they did this.
