12 billion a month for 6 years is what... 860 billion or so?
Interestingly enough, we would not save any of that money under an Obama administration. Obama is the sponsor of S. 2433 which would send 800 billion of that right back to Africa to fight poverty.
We have all seen how good and non-corrupt that has been in the past.
Of that 800 billion it is likely not even half makes it to the intended target.
Also, remember Saddam had no weapons, but he also was playing it up that he did to balance with Iran. Given that our intelligence is so bad, it is hardly a stretch to assume we thought Iraq had them as well.
On top of that, the United States does one of the worst jobs in the world of counter-intelligence, while places in the Middle East do really good jobs. It is almost a certainty to those who follow that kind of thing, that Iraq was running a CI operation on us, just as we were trying to gather whatever intel we could find. Problem is, Saddam thought we would take the UN route again, and honestly believed he would outlast the attack, just as he did in 91. This of course proved to be false.
Thanks to a surge that restored order and stability. Of course Obama proposed the 16 month time table before the surge even started. I hardly think the credit is with him on any success.
Given that "rich" people pay the vast majority of taxes, who do you think is really shouldering the burden of a "taxpayer funded" bailout? Those who were against the bailout for the most part as I recall were House Republicans, not Democrats.
So far his solution is just more taxes and capping the price. Bad and worse.