Skip to comments.Club for Growth Rates Presidential Candidates Economic Plans
Posted on 01/14/2012 2:38:31 PM PST by SaveOurRepublicFromTyranny
FOX's Neil Cavuto interviews Club for Growth's Andy Roth who rates the GOP presidential candidates economic plans.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Speaker Gingrich-led Republicans
.the result: * Voting on each of the Contract with America items * Four consecutive balanced budgets * Over $500 billion of debt paid off * Major welfare reform accomplished * 11 million new jobs for America * Unemployment falling to under 4%.
Says what we already know about these yahoos:
- Santorum is trying to compensate for being a spender in the US Senate.
- Perry is OK.
- Huntsman allowed spending to run wild while he was governor - but was good on taxes.
- Romney is completely unimpressive.
- Paul has the credibility to be believed when he says he wants to hack five agencies and a trillion bucks out of the budget right off the bat.
- Newt is also compensating and is very iffy.
The GOP wonders why no one believes their “we’ll cut spending” twaddle any more. The only candidate they have who has a track record of really cutting federal spending (or voting against spending) is Paul, and the GOP elites think Paul is too whacky for the job.
When were those balanced budgets?
When did the National Debt decrease $500 billion?
According to the US Treasury, the National Debt hasn't decreased in any fiscal year since about 1957.
The GOP elites aren’t the only ones who think Paul is too whacky for the job.
Endorsing Cynthia McKinney does not create credibility.
Google may be your friend; it’s not mine.
And the Bureau of the Public Debt is your mortal enemy.
It proves the lie to your assertion that Gingrich balanced the budget and decreased the debt.
The last time the National Debt decreased over the course of a fiscal year was 1957.
Bet you can’t prove me wrong.
Which means that if you post your specious assertion of “Gingrich cut the debt by $500 billion”, you’re a liar.
Spending is the most important issue in this election, period. The next president has to be credible on cutting spending. The Republicans absolutely destroyed themselves during Lyndon Baines Bush’s presidency with their spending plans. Sure the Dems are worse, but that doesn’t mean the GOP gets a good grade for being Dem-lite. I am so sick of that. Cut spending to get the budget back down to two trillion dollars a year and leave it there for 8 years.
Yes, because Rick Perry reads these forums, and would listen to you.
It is possible to make a $500B payment on the debt AND have the annual debt for that year increase. Your myopic focus on the debt as an "annual" only measurement does not mean there were never any reductions in the debt.
So you’re claming that every time a T-bill matures and rolls-over, that since the old one was paid off that’s a reduction in debt?
You probably also think you can make yourself rich by taking money out of one pocket and putting it into the other.
You’re so correct! We are facing bankruptcy and can’t afford any more “big government” conservatives. I like your name “Lyndon Baines Bush”. It’s right on.
What? I’m saying the flaw in your argument is concentratring on a whole years worth of activity. Just because the debt never went dowm for a whole year doesn’t mean there were no reductions during the year. It is annoying to watch you careen around here calling people liars based on a faulty argument. That’s all I’m saying.
If you make a $500 payment on your MasterCard and then charge $600 on it, did you really pay-off $500?
Yes, or else your balance would be $1100.
“Spending is the most important issue in this election, period. The next president has to be credible on cutting spending. The Republicans absolutely destroyed themselves during Lyndon Baines Bushs presidency with their spending plans.”
No, no, no.
You start with a balance of $1000.
Your credit limit is $1500.
You have $500 in cash.
You want to buy something that costs $600.
You can pay $500 on the credit card, and then charge the whole amount, or you can pay $500 cash and charge $100.
Either way, you end up with a credit card balance of $1100.
If you take the former approach, yes, you can say you “paid down $500 in debt”, but either way you end up at the same point.
It’s a difference without a distinction.
If you want to argue otherwise, you could just as well argue what the meaning of the word “is” is.
I'm not "calling people liars". I'm calling one person a liar because he's rampantly making assertions that have no basis in fact, and, when challenged on it, his response is "GIFY".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.