Skip to comments.
The Republican spending orgy
Boston Globe ^
| 7/20/2003
| Jeff Jacoby
Posted on 07/20/2003 5:29:31 AM PDT by RJCogburn
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:10:31 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
AT THEIR national convention three years ago, Republicans pointed with pride to the GOP's record of fiscal rectitude.
''In the four decades from 1954 to 1994,'' the Republican platform declared, ''government spending increased at an average annual rate of 7.9 percent, and the public's debt increased from $224 billion to $3.4 trillion.'' Those were the profligate years, when Democrats usually controlled both houses of Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280, 281-286 next last
To: ModernDayCato
To vote for someone who has basically betrayed me, my cause and my side of this battle because someone worse might get elected is ridiculous.And yes, I think W has more morals in his pinky than Hillary or Bill.
First of all W hasn't betrayed anyone. It's just that he isn't up to YOUR standards. Secondly, how can you absolve your statement. On one hand you intonate Bush has betrayed you, but if someone comes along who worse it's ridiculous NOT to vote for them. What the hell does that mean?
Then WHO would you vote for that could get elected?
The problem here is there is no one out there with the "extreme" conservatives views you have that's electable.
Where have you been the past Twelve years? Do you mean to tell me that "Compassionate Conservative" didn't give you the slightest clue as to what type of ideology you were voting for?
Bush HAS given us tax cuts, he told you he would, and did!!!
To: RJCogburn
the government will end the current fiscal year with a budget deficit of $455 billion. Over the next five years, the public debt is expected to rise by $1.9 trillion. The administration projects next year's federal outlays at $2.27 trillion, more than $400 billion higher than when the president took office.Holy crap. I had no idea the numbers were this bad. I'm speechless.
242
posted on
07/20/2003 3:55:36 PM PDT
by
Sandy
To: Dane
your little chart shows nothing about the changes in the Defense budgetNo kidding. Defense spending isn't considered discretionary.
243
posted on
07/20/2003 4:07:22 PM PDT
by
Sandy
To: GatekeeperBookman
Read your Post (#78) as I suppose you read mine (#16)..........
I watched Dennis Hastert try to explain this hubris to Russert this morning. He said, "We've been in a recession and we're trying to stimulate the economy. Besides, the deficit is a small percentage of the total US economy". {/paraphrase}
While I understand this strategy of running a deficit (ie. the opposite of the tight money policies taken back in 1929, which led to outright depression) I disagree with the methodology used to get the money into the economy.
Don't they trust us anymore?
Whatever happened to letting the marketplace decide the allocation of capital and the correct goods and services produced?
Is this country that far gone that Bush has to engage in the 'vote-buying' scam utilized by the Democrats for the past 70 years?
Doesn't he realize that they're never going to like him, no matter what he does?
Fat, gluttonous pigs like Kennedy, Shillary, Boxer, Byrd, Gephardt, and Pelosi will belly up to the trough, sink their snouts deep in the garbage, eat their fill, lift their snouts out, belch, fart and then waddle over and defecate on your shoes.
To quote the Beatles........"Money can't buy me love".
244
posted on
07/20/2003 5:20:19 PM PDT
by
DoctorMichael
(>>>>>Liberals Suk. Liberalism Sukz.<<<<<)
To: WOSG
To be honest with you, I was never all that excited about Bork's philosophy, which is FAR different from Scalia and Thomas'.
Regardless--the BushBoyzz on the Court will not be a big improvement.
245
posted on
07/20/2003 5:34:57 PM PDT
by
ninenot
(Torquemada: Due for Revival Soon!!!)
To: WOSG
Ah--the cost of Gummint has gone up by about 9% since you checked first-class mail. It's not 34 cents--it's 37.
246
posted on
07/20/2003 5:36:37 PM PDT
by
ninenot
(Torquemada: Due for Revival Soon!!!)
To: Mulder
Well--it's a mixed bag on 'one vote.'
The 'one vote' actually makes a difference on local and on many State elections--but statistically, that's no surprise.
Unfortunately in the National elections, the Democrats are able to resurrect so many dead bodies, and double-vote so many students (once at college, once at home) and registr so many people who live at addresses occupied by Dumptsters--that in Wisconsin, e.g., Bush "lost" the State by 5,000 votes. Same-o for Iowa.
It is simply not true that Bush lost--if the voting was accurate. We simply didn't have the necessary dead-body power.
247
posted on
07/20/2003 5:42:19 PM PDT
by
ninenot
(Torquemada: Due for Revival Soon!!!)
To: sirchtruth
Well, the time for pulling a rabbit out of the hat is getting REALLY near...
Frankly, this thread and Jacoby's column should be good for old GWB. One of his WH political stiffs will be reading this and getting an earful--which is just fine by me.
248
posted on
07/20/2003 5:43:55 PM PDT
by
ninenot
(Torquemada: Due for Revival Soon!!!)
To: DoctorMichael
then waddle over and defecate on your shoes...while screwing your daughter.
249
posted on
07/20/2003 5:45:39 PM PDT
by
ninenot
(Torquemada: Due for Revival Soon!!!)
To: ninenot
Frankly, this thread and Jacoby's column should be good for old GWB. One of his WH political stiffs will be reading this and getting an earful--which is just fine by me. 'xactly ... Let Rove & Co. know the natives are getting restless, and GWB wont be hankering to spend more of our money to be 'compassionate' for the '04 campaign! He has my vote already, but how hard I bother to work myself up over it adn put heat on my LibDem/indep pals depends on him doing *my* frugal/conservative/smallGovt bidding and not the bidding of the RINO/moderate constituencies.
250
posted on
07/20/2003 6:29:23 PM PDT
by
WOSG
(We liberated Iraq. Now Let's Free Cuba, North Korea, Iran, China, Tibet, Syria, ...)
To: sirchtruth
First of all W hasn't betrayed anyone. It's just that he isn't up to YOUR standards. This is true. Anyone who expected a Phil Gramm-type budget-cutter just didnt read the fine print on the label "compassionate conservative". Everything he is doing, on education, prescription drug benefit, etc. is consistent with what he said and did in his 2000 campaign. He has faults, but GWB has kept promises and delivered on his intended goals.
251
posted on
07/20/2003 6:31:45 PM PDT
by
WOSG
(We liberated Iraq. Now Let's Free Cuba, North Korea, Iran, China, Tibet, Syria, ...)
To: WOSG
Anyone who expected Bush to be a fiscal conservative was doing so because of their own preconceived expectations of hi. His record in Texas, which was staggeringly free-spending, and his rhetoric during the campaign said it all.
People who are waiting for Bush to "get more conservative once he is safely past the election" are waiting for something that will never come. He is what he is and, to his credit, has created a political image very close to his private reality. His believes that massive government spending is necessary and appropriate for a compassionate society. I and other conservatives could not disagree more. Bush in not being unprincipled here - he is being who he is.
To: GatekeeperBookman
Sticking younger people with a (supposed) $400 billion tax bill is not conducive to attracting votes.
253
posted on
07/20/2003 6:58:49 PM PDT
by
nonliberal
(Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
To: sirchtruth
First of all W hasn't betrayed anyone. It's just that he isn't up to YOUR standards. Winner of the most incongruous statement this evening. Uh, my STANDARDS are all about his keeping his word. Yep, he didn't live up to my standards.
And honestly, this one is getting stale: Then WHO would you vote for that could get elected?
The fact that there's no one better doesn't change the fact that he sucks.
The problem here is there is no one out there with the "extreme" conservatives views. Yep, those "extreme" conservative views, like smaller government, personal responsibility, and GASP keeping the promises you make.
You are part of the mounting proof of how far to the left our party has lurched.
To: GatekeeperBookman
It is hard to pick a winner in a horse-race where all the horses seem to be short of stature and have exceptionally long ears.
Your views are very refreshing.
To: sirchtruth
I am supposing now that to you spending = Liberal?Worse. This kind of spending is Socialist.
256
posted on
07/21/2003 5:01:49 AM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
To: ModernDayCato
I know you are but what am I? Is this the way you debate?I am geniunely convinced that "Dane" is still in high-school.
Maybe even middle-school.
257
posted on
07/21/2003 5:09:41 AM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
To: ModernDayCato
Touche! How clever.LOL!
The sad thing is, middle-school child Dane will not recognize the sarcasm, and will walk from this post thinking: "Ha! I *AM* clever, aren't I?"
LOL!
258
posted on
07/21/2003 5:13:47 AM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
To: Lazamataz
Worse. This kind of spending is Socialist.You couldn't just leave it alone could ya? Ya had to go and conjure up some minilla nasties and muck up a perfectly good ending to an argument! Now, I'm gonna have to bring out the Super Industrial Strength can of Whoop Ass!
Socialist!!! Look, Tazzzzz, I realize Bush has been spending like a mayor's cheap hooker, but I don't believe his plan is complete! There are other things I think he is going to put into place to offset this modern disbursal. Argue all you want that this is socialist spending, but you can't come up with another person who is electable, that would be better.
psssssssssssssss! (can of WA spraying all over you!)
To: sirchtruth
I refuse to be subjected to the "Stay on the plantation" mentality you are exhibiting. I'm not black and you are not the DNC.
260
posted on
07/21/2003 5:29:14 AM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280, 281-286 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson