"It was under Mr Bush that the deficit spiralled out of control as we fought an unnecessary and endless $3,000bn war in Iraq..."
- James Carville, the Financial Times.
Once upon a time, it was cool and even factually correct to say that the Iraq war was a significant contributor to the federal budget deficits... but my oh my how times, congresses and administrations change.
Exit question: Would it now be cool and even factually correct to say that the Iraq war is/was budgetarily insignificant?
Puts current domestic spending in a whole new light, now doesn't it?