Posted on 02/08/2010 3:22:02 AM PST by UAConservative
Yes, George W. Bush spent too much and proved redundantly that the term “big government conservative” is an oxymoron. And yes, when Bush left office our economy was in trouble. But how long will Obama claim that the only way for our economy to recover is to continue a spending spree that will leave us unable to recover from government debt?
Apparently, forever. In his State of the Union speech, Obama said, “One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt. Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression. So we acted -- immediately and aggressively. And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.”
But it hasn’t. Unemployment is still nearly 10% and -- according to Reagan administration economist Arthur Laffer -- the “recovery” we are in is a false one. With the Bush tax cuts about to expire, and both capital gains taxes and estate taxes to rise next year, we’re headed into a far worse economic crisis than we suffered last year. But that doesn’t deter the president one bit.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
He’s going to play it as long as he thinks people will buy it, and unfortunatly there are a lot of people out there who still follow that brand of thinking (it shows what a wonderful job our schools have done in teaching people about government).
Hopefully, more people will see him for the whining moocher he is and cast their votes with someone else, but I’m not holding my breath.
“...which still allows increased spending - reduces that to 99%, still far too high.”
And we should be cheering congressman Ryan’s efforts here?
And this weekend the maoist claimed that President Bush was guilty of a ‘dereliction of duty’.
And we stand by and allow those attacks?
ENOUGH ALREADY
Yes, we should. Has anyone else tried to break the status quo?
George W. Bush has a likeable personality and a compassionate heart. He has no successor yet in those areas.
“Ryan’s plan — which still allows increased spending - reduces that to 99%, still far too high.”
We do not need “increased spending” and we can not afford it. At all.
I don’t think reducing the federal budget to only 99% of the GDP is anything to hoot and holler about.
Well until someone offers something better, I guess I’m a pragmatist.
I hear you, but I think that we have to make them do better. Otherwise, we are toast.
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.