Franken-Lies-And-the-Lying-Liars-Who-Tell

28
Bush Can't Lose with Clinton's Military
Did Clinton gut the military because there was no evidence that countries like Iraq,
Iran, North Korea, and an increasingly aggressive Communist China would represent
serious future threats to America and our friends and allies? No. Rather, it
was because he loathed the military.
-Sean Hannity, Let Freedom Ring
Do I continue to quote Let Freedom Ring because there is no evidence to support his claims?
Partly. But mostly it is because I loathe Sean Hannity. And because I think he represents a
serious threat to America and our friends and allies.
On page 82 of Hannity's ringing denunciation of the left, he produces what is quite
simply the greatest table I've ever seen:
COMPARISON OF DEFENSE BUDGETS
Reagan-Bush
1986
Clinton-Gore
1996
New tanks requested in president's budget 840 0
New tactical aircraft requested in president's budget 399 34
New naval ships requested in president's budget 40 6
This is a table created by a child for children.
Where to start? First of all, in 1996 we didn't need any new tanks. The end of the Cold
War had reduced the likelihood of an enormous tank battle across the plains of Central
Europe to below zero. How many tanks do you think were requested in the first Bush-Cheney
budget? Let's make a new chart, keeping Reagan but also comparing the final Clinton-Gore
defense budget with the first Bush-Cheney defense budget.
COMPARISON OF DEFENSE BUDGETS
Reagan-Bush
1986
Clinton-Gore
2001
Bush-Cheney
2002
New tanks requested in president's budget 840 0 0