|
|
May 24, 2013
|
|
U.S. Gives Big Aid Package to PakistanPosted on Jul 19, 2010
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was flexing her diplomatic chops on Monday during a strategic visit to Pakistan, where she announced a hefty aid package—to the tune of $7.5 billion—and this time, the funding is ostensibly intended for nonmilitary purposes. —KA
Advertisement Previous item: Obama’s Unlikely Allies in Immigration Reform Next item: Finally, a Little Hope for the Unemployed? New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By ofersince72, July 20, 2010 at 8:14 am Link to this comment
Republicans are pathetic weasal liars, unfortunatly,
so are the Democrats who collude with them on about every
issue. Since the 2006 elections, it has never been more
evident the “Good Guy , Bad Guy” split and divide policy
by the duopoly.
When Americans began to administer death to the
Report thisRepublican Party in both the 2006 and 2008 elections, it
was the Democrat Party to the rescue, you need both
members of the duopoly to play the game, one can’t survive
without the other.
By Peetawonkus, July 20, 2010 at 6:29 am Link to this comment
Pakistan, whose Intelligence Services trained the Taliban and have given aid and comfort to Al-Quaeda. Pakistan, which was far more connected to 9-11 than Iraq or Iran. So far every country the U.S. has managed to attack has had nothing to do with 9-11 and the countries which did receive aid packages. Interesting…
Report thisBy berniem, July 19, 2010 at 3:08 pm Link to this comment
Look Mom! I’ve bought a new puppet for my Amerikan Imperial Playhouse Theatre! Wow, now I can make-up some really neat stories to put on for the rest of the kids in the neighborhood and, oh, sure Mom, for you and the rest of the family here at home, too!
Report thisBy nemesis2010, July 19, 2010 at 2:31 pm Link to this comment
How is it that redistributed wealth to foreigners and Big Corps is never labeled socialism and is always promoted as a positive but redistributing to fellow citizens and/or to rebuild our aging infrastructure here in the U.S. is negative and socialism?
Is not wealth obtained through government coercion from one or more groups of individuals and redistributed to others socialist redistribution of wealth? Where is the outcry from all those phony baloney republicans and conservatives when the government gives away over a billion a year to a very questionable ally?
Listen to jackass Pete Sessions step all over his little penis as he unsuccessfully tries to cover up the fact that he and his ilk of the republican party have nothing more than talking points as the grand republican plan for fiscal responsibility.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HLlSfgJQh4&feature=player_embedded
I wonder if Petey and his boy friends will try to block this “aid” package and help us live within our means or if by “living within our means” he and his fellow septic tank dwellers mean that we only cut social services and infrastructure repair and building when it concerns the very people who have suffered the coercive confiscation of the product of their labors by their government.
How can any American not feel a sense of embarrassment whenever these politicians speak? The level of stupid possessed by the pompous asses that hold seats in the U.S. Congress and positions of power throughout the government is appalling. It’s shameful that such ignorant individuals are making policy rather than digging ditches or emptying garbage cans into large trucks.
Report thisBy MarthaA, July 19, 2010 at 1:31 pm Link to this comment
Giving away an awful lot of money that is needed in our own country. This is acting like a mother who doesn’t see any need to take care of her children and gives all her money to the church or whatever and blames the children because they have no food or clothing, which is a very bad picture. First we should take care of the United States’ employment situation so the populace will be able to work, instead of blaming the populace because there aren’t enough McJobs for them to survive since all their jobs have been outsourced.
Report thisBy MarthaA, July 19, 2010 at 1:31 pm Link to this comment
Giving away an awful lot of money that is needed in our own country. This is acting like a mother who doesn’t see any need to take care of her own children and gives all her money to the church or whatever and blames the children because they have no food or clothing, which is a very bad picture. Would our government take her children away from her? If so, it is the same situation. First, our government should take care of the United States’ employment situation so the populace will be able to work, instead of blaming the populace because there aren’t enough McJobs for them to survive, since all their jobs have been outsourced.
Report thisBy skulz fontaine, July 19, 2010 at 11:24 am Link to this comment
Mountains of money for “them” and none for America. Bailouts and/or stimulus
Report thismoney for Wall Street hardly helps ‘we live here’ Americans.
By felicity, July 19, 2010 at 6:41 am Link to this comment
Amazing how little hoopla is made as we distribute stimulus money/packages world-wide - Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan…too long a list for this post. But when it comes to extending unemployment benefits for out of work Americans? Forget it.
The logical conclusion to be drawn is that the former is profitable for the people making the rules and the latter realizes little or no profit for anybody, nevermind that not extending the benefits wreaks great hardship on our fellow Americans.
Report this