[TastyManatees]

>"It is discretionary non-DoD spending that has gone up like it was managed by a drunken sailor under Bush."

O.K., here you go (from the piece):

"3. All other discretionary spending increased from the previous Administration's final 2001 budget of $331 billion to a whopping $381 billion budgeted for 2004. This difference amounts to approximately $50 billion, or 15%. Over three years.

See the response above for a discussion of the dishonesty of the tactics currently being used to characterize NON-discretionary entitlement spending (Medicare) as somehow overshadowing defense spending.

Please forgive me for my irate tone a few posts back. I didn't mean for it to come out as insulting as it did, but the post I was replying to seemed a little bit like a thinly-veiled attack on the propriety of defending this nation from attack. I think I was mistaken in that initial read, and I apologize.

Tasty Manatees

[LTCJ]

I must apologize also for the tone of my previous reply. I have developed a rather acute sensitivity over the last few months to the differences I perceive between "moderate" and "conservative" policies as we approach next November. Truth be told, it probably partially stems from my relative naivete to it in the past.

One thing that stuck me as odd, though was the 15% figure. Two days ago I saw that figure given as 31%, and I seem to remember it coming from a rather conservative source.

Rest assured however, I'll not ever be caught proposing a liberal position on defense.