<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: War Is an Economic Policy, Senator McCain</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-154033</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:04:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-154033</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Jack...&lt;/strong&gt;

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Jack&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lafa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-152557</link>
		<dc:creator>Lafa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 16:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-152557</guid>
		<description>War is a waiste of people's time and a lot of money...there's NO point in fighting!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>War is a waiste of people&#8217;s time and a lot of money&#8230;there&#8217;s NO point in fighting!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-151105</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-151105</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;[The Times April 29, 2008]Tariq Aziz, once the international face of Saddam Hussein’s regime, is due to appear in a Baghdad court today, accused of playing a part in the execution of a group of businessmen more than 15 years ago.

&lt;b&gt;Mr Aziz, the former Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, and seven others are accused of killing 42 dealers in 1992 after blaming them for raising food prices when Iraq was suffering under UN sanctions&lt;/b&gt;...."&lt;/i&gt;

Hmmm. Suppose there is any possibility of him being released, given US citizenship, and elected to Congress?

Aziz is a "Christian", merely by the way.

Mr. Paul? Mr. Paul?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>[The Times April 29, 2008]Tariq Aziz, once the international face of Saddam Hussein’s regime, is due to appear in a Baghdad court today, accused of playing a part in the execution of a group of businessmen more than 15 years ago.</p>
<p><b>Mr Aziz, the former Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, and seven others are accused of killing 42 dealers in 1992 after blaming them for raising food prices when Iraq was suffering under UN sanctions</b>&#8230;.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Hmmm. Suppose there is any possibility of him being released, given US citizenship, and elected to Congress?</p>
<p>Aziz is a &#8220;Christian&#8221;, merely by the way.</p>
<p>Mr. Paul? Mr. Paul?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-151097</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:43:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-151097</guid>
		<description>Calling Mr. Paul, calling Mr. Paul:

&lt;i&gt;Dear Eugene,

Last Friday, we sent out an alert asking our members to contact House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers.  Our goal was to have him issue subpoenas to former Attorney General John Ashcroft and former Justice Department official John Yoo, requiring them to testify about the sanctioning of torture in the Bush administration's Justice Department.  In response, more than 6,000 of our members sent emails to Chairman Conyers. 

Yesterday, the Associated Press reported that Chairman Conyers was, in fact, threatening to issue subpoenas to Ashcroft and Yoo!  Here is how the article started: 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee on Monday threatened to serve subpoenas on former Attorney General John Ashcroft and two others associated with the Bush administration's interrogation policies if they don't agree to testify. 

If the three - including John C. Yoo, the former assistant deputy attorney general, and David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff - do not reply by Friday, "I will have no choice but to consider the use of compulsory process," Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., wrote in letters to them. 

That's Washington-speak for issuing congressional subpoenas.
 

We are thrilled that Chairman Conyers is moving in the right direction, but the fight is certainly not over yet.  Taking on the White House is never easy and he needs all the encouragement he can get. 

If you have not sent an email to Chairman Conyers yet, please click on the following link to get started:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=24355

Thank you so much for joining us in this effort.

Steve

Steve Fox
Campaign Director
American Freedom Campaign Action Fund&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Calling Mr. Paul, calling Mr. Paul:</p>
<p><i>Dear Eugene,</p>
<p>Last Friday, we sent out an alert asking our members to contact House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers.  Our goal was to have him issue subpoenas to former Attorney General John Ashcroft and former Justice Department official John Yoo, requiring them to testify about the sanctioning of torture in the Bush administration&#8217;s Justice Department.  In response, more than 6,000 of our members sent emails to Chairman Conyers. </p>
<p>Yesterday, the Associated Press reported that Chairman Conyers was, in fact, threatening to issue subpoenas to Ashcroft and Yoo!  Here is how the article started: </p>
<p>WASHINGTON (AP) - The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee on Monday threatened to serve subpoenas on former Attorney General John Ashcroft and two others associated with the Bush administration&#8217;s interrogation policies if they don&#8217;t agree to testify. </p>
<p>If the three - including John C. Yoo, the former assistant deputy attorney general, and David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney&#8217;s chief of staff - do not reply by Friday, &#8220;I will have no choice but to consider the use of compulsory process,&#8221; Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., wrote in letters to them. </p>
<p>That&#8217;s Washington-speak for issuing congressional subpoenas.</p>
<p>We are thrilled that Chairman Conyers is moving in the right direction, but the fight is certainly not over yet.  Taking on the White House is never easy and he needs all the encouragement he can get. </p>
<p>If you have not sent an email to Chairman Conyers yet, please click on the following link to get started:</p>
<p><a href="http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=24355" rel="nofollow">http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=24355</a></p>
<p>Thank you so much for joining us in this effort.</p>
<p>Steve</p>
<p>Steve Fox<br />
Campaign Director<br />
American Freedom Campaign Action Fund</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-151019</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 01:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-151019</guid>
		<description>Gasoline at $10 per gallon?

http://www2.nysun.com/article/75363</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gasoline at $10 per gallon?</p>
<p><a href="http://www2.nysun.com/article/75363" rel="nofollow">http://www2.nysun.com/article/75363</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150926</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 05:36:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150926</guid>
		<description>Incidentally notice the ventriloquist and his dummy. Bush says he is giving you money back, and Schumer says that it is not Israel and the Iraq War that is the problem, but OPEC, hehe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Incidentally notice the ventriloquist and his dummy. Bush says he is giving you money back, and Schumer says that it is not Israel and the Iraq War that is the problem, but OPEC, hehe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150891</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 05:35:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150891</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt; Brett Arends WSJ: 

Load Up the Pantry
April 21, 2008 6:47 p.m.

I don't want to alarm anybody, but maybe it's time for Americans to start stockpiling food.

No, this is not a drill.

You've seen the TV footage of food riots in parts of the developing world. Yes, they're a long way away from the U.S. But most foodstuffs operate in a global market. When the cost of wheat soars in Asia, it will do the same here.
.
Reality: Food prices are already rising here much faster than the returns you are likely to get from keeping your money in a bank or money-market fund. And there are very good reasons to believe prices on the shelves are about to start rising a lot faster.

"Load up the pantry," says Manu Daftary, one of Wall Street's top investors and the manager of the Quaker Strategic Growth mutual fund. "I think prices are going higher. People are too complacent. They think it isn't going to happen here. But I don't know how the food companies can absorb higher costs." (Full disclosure: I am an investor in Quaker Strategic)

Stocking up on food may not replace your long-term investments, but it may make a sensible home for some of your shorter-term cash. Do the math. If you keep your standby cash in a money-market fund you'll be lucky to get a 2.5% interest rate. Even the best one-year certificate of deposit you can find is only going to pay you about 4.1%, according to Bankrate.com. And those yields are before tax.

Meanwhile the most recent government data shows. food inflation for the average American household is now running at 4.5% a year.

And some prices are rising even more quickly. The latest data show cereal prices rising by more than 8% a year. Both flour and rice are up more than 13%. Milk, cheese, bananas and even peanut butter: They're all up by more than 10%. Eggs have rocketed up 30% in a year. Ground beef prices are up 4.8% and chicken by 5.4%.&lt;/i&gt;


Stock up on food? On verra. Neckties might be a better investment. They may be in short supply soon....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i> Brett Arends WSJ: </p>
<p>Load Up the Pantry<br />
April 21, 2008 6:47 p.m.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t want to alarm anybody, but maybe it&#8217;s time for Americans to start stockpiling food.</p>
<p>No, this is not a drill.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve seen the TV footage of food riots in parts of the developing world. Yes, they&#8217;re a long way away from the U.S. But most foodstuffs operate in a global market. When the cost of wheat soars in Asia, it will do the same here.<br />
.<br />
Reality: Food prices are already rising here much faster than the returns you are likely to get from keeping your money in a bank or money-market fund. And there are very good reasons to believe prices on the shelves are about to start rising a lot faster.</p>
<p>&#8220;Load up the pantry,&#8221; says Manu Daftary, one of Wall Street&#8217;s top investors and the manager of the Quaker Strategic Growth mutual fund. &#8220;I think prices are going higher. People are too complacent. They think it isn&#8217;t going to happen here. But I don&#8217;t know how the food companies can absorb higher costs.&#8221; (Full disclosure: I am an investor in Quaker Strategic)</p>
<p>Stocking up on food may not replace your long-term investments, but it may make a sensible home for some of your shorter-term cash. Do the math. If you keep your standby cash in a money-market fund you&#8217;ll be lucky to get a 2.5% interest rate. Even the best one-year certificate of deposit you can find is only going to pay you about 4.1%, according to Bankrate.com. And those yields are before tax.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the most recent government data shows. food inflation for the average American household is now running at 4.5% a year.</p>
<p>And some prices are rising even more quickly. The latest data show cereal prices rising by more than 8% a year. Both flour and rice are up more than 13%. Milk, cheese, bananas and even peanut butter: They&#8217;re all up by more than 10%. Eggs have rocketed up 30% in a year. Ground beef prices are up 4.8% and chicken by 5.4%.</i></p>
<p>Stock up on food? On verra. Neckties might be a better investment. They may be in short supply soon&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150890</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 04:59:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150890</guid>
		<description>&#60;i.[AP Arpil 25,2008] "The money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we're seeing at the gas pump, the grocery store, and also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown," Bush said.

Bush's emphasis on fuel and food prices differed from other comments he's made since signing the economic stimulus legislation, intended to aid the economy by boosting overall consumer spending — which accounts for roughly two-thirds of the nation's economic activity.

Bush has suggested the rebates could trigger a spending spree. "When the money reaches the American people, we expect they will use it to boost consumer spending," he said last month.

By saying expressly that people could use these one-time checks to pay for such necessities as food and gas, Bush underscored the deepening challenges facing the economy.

Democrats were quick to pick up on the change of focus.

"It's galling to think that taxpayers' stimulus checks will be lining the pockets of OPEC. The sad truth is that the average American family will spend almost their entire stimulus check on higher gas prices this year," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., chairman of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

OPEC is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&lt;i.[AP Arpil 25,2008] &#8220;The money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we&#8217;re seeing at the gas pump, the grocery store, and also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown,&#8221; Bush said.</p>
<p>Bush&#8217;s emphasis on fuel and food prices differed from other comments he&#8217;s made since signing the economic stimulus legislation, intended to aid the economy by boosting overall consumer spending — which accounts for roughly two-thirds of the nation&#8217;s economic activity.</p>
<p>Bush has suggested the rebates could trigger a spending spree. &#8220;When the money reaches the American people, we expect they will use it to boost consumer spending,&#8221; he said last month.</p>
<p>By saying expressly that people could use these one-time checks to pay for such necessities as food and gas, Bush underscored the deepening challenges facing the economy.</p>
<p>Democrats were quick to pick up on the change of focus.</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s galling to think that taxpayers&#8217; stimulus checks will be lining the pockets of OPEC. The sad truth is that the average American family will spend almost their entire stimulus check on higher gas prices this year,&#8221; said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., chairman of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.</p>
<p>OPEC is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150792</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150792</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&lt;b&gt;Senate votes to ban insurers from discriminating based on DNA&#60;/B.

WASHINGTON [AP April 24, 2008]- The Senate has passed legislation that prohibits health insurance companies and employers from discriminating against people based on the results of genetic testing.

The 95-0 vote sends the bill back to the House for a final vote early next week. President Bush supports the legislation.

DNA testing can show some people to be at greater risk of cancer or other serious illnesses. The bill bars health insurance companies from using such information to set premiums or determine eligibility. Employers couldn't use that information for hiring and firing decisions.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/i&gt;

The economic significance of this item (not what the Senate did, but what they are doing) may be lost on the Paulists.  

It is not lost on Kucinich, I strongly suspect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i><b>Senate votes to ban insurers from discriminating based on DNA&lt;/B.</p>
<p>WASHINGTON [AP April 24, 2008]- The Senate has passed legislation that prohibits health insurance companies and employers from discriminating against people based on the results of genetic testing.</p>
<p>The 95-0 vote sends the bill back to the House for a final vote early next week. President Bush supports the legislation.</p>
<p>DNA testing can show some people to be at greater risk of cancer or other serious illnesses. The bill bars health insurance companies from using such information to set premiums or determine eligibility. Employers couldn&#8217;t use that information for hiring and firing decisions.</b></i></p>
<p>The economic significance of this item (not what the Senate did, but what they are doing) may be lost on the Paulists.  </p>
<p>It is not lost on Kucinich, I strongly suspect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150791</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:16:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150791</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;WASHINGTON (AP April 24) -- Sales of new homes plunged in March to the lowest level in 16 1/2 years as housing slumped further at the start of the spring sales season.

The median price of a new home in March, compared with a year ago, fell by the largest amount in nearly four decades.

The Commerce Department reported Thursday that sales of new homes dropped by 8.5 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 526,000 units, the slowest sales pace since October 1991.

The median price of a home sold in March dropped by 13.3 percent compared with March 2007, the biggest year-over-year price decline since a 14.6 percent plunge in July 1970.

The dismal news on new home sales followed earlier reports showing sales of existing homes fell by 2 percent in March. Housing, which boomed for five years, has been in a prolonged slump for the past two years with sales and home prices falling at especially sharp rates in formerly boom areas of the country.

For March, sales were down in all regions of the country, dropping the most in the Northeast, a decline of 19.4 percent. Sales fell by 12.9 percent in the West, 12.5 percent in the Midwest and 4.6 percent in the South.

In other economic news, orders to factories for big-ticket manufactured goods fell for a third straight month in March, the longest string of declines since the 2001 recession, while applications for unemployment benefits fell by 33,000 to 342,000.

The Commerce Department said demand for durable goods dropped by 0.3 percent last month, a worse-than-expected performance that underscored the problems manufacturers are facing from a severe economic slowdown. The last time orders fell for three consecutive months was from February to April of 2001, when the country was sliding into the last recession.

The weakness in manufacturing orders was led by a 4.6 percent drop in orders for autos, a sector hard hit by soaring gasoline prices, and the weakening economy, which have cut sharply into car sales. Orders in the category that includes home appliances fell by 6.6 percent. This industry has been hurt by the two-year slump in home sales.

&lt;b&gt;President Bush said Tuesday that the economy was not in a recession but a period of slower growth.&lt;/b&gt; However, economists who believe the country has fallen into a recession pointed to the string of declines in manufacturing orders to support their view.

&lt;b&gt;"The broad swath of data in the March (orders) report is indicative of a mixed set of conditions in a factory sector that is, overall, in a mild recession,"&lt;/b&gt; said Cliff Waldman, economist for the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI....&lt;/i&gt;

[excerpt]


Indeed, indeed--a veritable motherlode of comedy....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>WASHINGTON (AP April 24) &#8212; Sales of new homes plunged in March to the lowest level in 16 1/2 years as housing slumped further at the start of the spring sales season.</p>
<p>The median price of a new home in March, compared with a year ago, fell by the largest amount in nearly four decades.</p>
<p>The Commerce Department reported Thursday that sales of new homes dropped by 8.5 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 526,000 units, the slowest sales pace since October 1991.</p>
<p>The median price of a home sold in March dropped by 13.3 percent compared with March 2007, the biggest year-over-year price decline since a 14.6 percent plunge in July 1970.</p>
<p>The dismal news on new home sales followed earlier reports showing sales of existing homes fell by 2 percent in March. Housing, which boomed for five years, has been in a prolonged slump for the past two years with sales and home prices falling at especially sharp rates in formerly boom areas of the country.</p>
<p>For March, sales were down in all regions of the country, dropping the most in the Northeast, a decline of 19.4 percent. Sales fell by 12.9 percent in the West, 12.5 percent in the Midwest and 4.6 percent in the South.</p>
<p>In other economic news, orders to factories for big-ticket manufactured goods fell for a third straight month in March, the longest string of declines since the 2001 recession, while applications for unemployment benefits fell by 33,000 to 342,000.</p>
<p>The Commerce Department said demand for durable goods dropped by 0.3 percent last month, a worse-than-expected performance that underscored the problems manufacturers are facing from a severe economic slowdown. The last time orders fell for three consecutive months was from February to April of 2001, when the country was sliding into the last recession.</p>
<p>The weakness in manufacturing orders was led by a 4.6 percent drop in orders for autos, a sector hard hit by soaring gasoline prices, and the weakening economy, which have cut sharply into car sales. Orders in the category that includes home appliances fell by 6.6 percent. This industry has been hurt by the two-year slump in home sales.</p>
<p><b>President Bush said Tuesday that the economy was not in a recession but a period of slower growth.</b> However, economists who believe the country has fallen into a recession pointed to the string of declines in manufacturing orders to support their view.</p>
<p><b>&#8220;The broad swath of data in the March (orders) report is indicative of a mixed set of conditions in a factory sector that is, overall, in a mild recession,&#8221;</b> said Cliff Waldman, economist for the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI&#8230;.</i></p>
<p>[excerpt]</p>
<p>Indeed, indeed&#8211;a veritable motherlode of comedy&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150727</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 03:33:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150727</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;The best way for the U.S. to ensure its oil supplies would be to protect the dollar's role as world reserve currency. Moreover, $3-5 trillion would have purchased a tremendous amount of oil. Prior to the U.S. invasions, the U.S. oil import bill was running less than $100 billion per year. Even in 2006 total U.S. imports from OPEC countries was $145 billion, and the U.S. trade deficit with OPEC totaled $106 billion. Three trillion dollars could have paid for U.S. oil imports for 30 years; $5 trillion could pay the U.S. oil bill for a half century had the Bush regime preserved a sound dollar....&lt;/i&gt;

Paul Craig Roberts


&lt;i&gt;I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil&lt;/i&gt;

Alan Greenspan


Oh, THAT Alan Greenspan on "political inconvenience" and "what EVERYONE knows", hehe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>The best way for the U.S. to ensure its oil supplies would be to protect the dollar&#8217;s role as world reserve currency. Moreover, $3-5 trillion would have purchased a tremendous amount of oil. Prior to the U.S. invasions, the U.S. oil import bill was running less than $100 billion per year. Even in 2006 total U.S. imports from OPEC countries was $145 billion, and the U.S. trade deficit with OPEC totaled $106 billion. Three trillion dollars could have paid for U.S. oil imports for 30 years; $5 trillion could pay the U.S. oil bill for a half century had the Bush regime preserved a sound dollar&#8230;.</i></p>
<p>Paul Craig Roberts</p>
<p><i>I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil</i></p>
<p>Alan Greenspan</p>
<p>Oh, THAT Alan Greenspan on &#8220;political inconvenience&#8221; and &#8220;what EVERYONE knows&#8221;, hehe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/04/16/war-is-an-economic-policy-senator-mccain/#comment-150726</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 02:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4286#comment-150726</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Connecticut News April 23, 2008: Stung by the slowing economy, the state's projected budget surplus for the current fiscal year has shrunk to $15.7 million — a tissue-thin amount in a state budget of more than $18 billion.

The sharp drop in expected revenue is expected to play a key role in negotiations over the proposed state budget during the next two weeks as Gov. M. Jodi Rell and legislators seek to fund a wide variety of services — ranging from nursing homes and homeless shelters to prisons and public schools.

Nursing homes and nonprofit organizations already are complaining that an expected 1 percent cost-of-living increase is too low, and the lower surplus projections will probably make budget decisions more difficult, lawmakers said.

The latest numbers touched off a clash between Democrats and Republicans over the projected revenue drop, which is the result of lower-than-expected tax collections and a one-year postponement of Medicaid reimbursement payments. The state expects to receive the $82.5 million in reimbursements from the federal government next year....&lt;/i&gt;

[excerpt]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Connecticut News April 23, 2008: Stung by the slowing economy, the state&#8217;s projected budget surplus for the current fiscal year has shrunk to $15.7 million — a tissue-thin amount in a state budget of more than $18 billion.</p>
<p>The sharp drop in expected revenue is expected to play a key role in negotiations over the proposed state budget during the next two weeks as Gov. M. Jodi Rell and legislators seek to fund a wide variety of services — ranging from nursing homes and homeless shelters to prisons and public schools.</p>
<p>Nursing homes and nonprofit organizations already are complaining that an expected 1 percent cost-of-living increase is too low, and the lower surplus projections will probably make budget decisions more difficult, lawmakers said.</p>
<p>The latest numbers touched off a clash between Democrats and Republicans over the projected revenue drop, which is the result of lower-than-expected tax collections and a one-year postponement of Medicaid reimbursement payments. The state expects to receive the $82.5 million in reimbursements from the federal government next year&#8230;.</i></p>
<p>[excerpt]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
