GOP slams Bush policies at retreat

The Washington Times ^ | 2/6/04 | By Ralph Z. Hallow and James G. Lakely

[ovrtaxt]

Growing frustration over President Bush's immigration plan and lack of fiscal discipline came to a head behind closed doors at last weekend's Republican retreat in Philadelphia.

House lawmakers, stunned by the intensity of their constituents' displeasure at some of Mr. Bush's key domestic policies, gave his political strategist Karl Rove an earful behind closed doors.

[FreeReign]

The comparison chart you use for discretionary spending is misleading. By definition, discretionary spending means spending that is done at the power or right of one's own judgment. The starting point for discretionary spending every fiscal year is -- zero. There is no mandatory aspect to it. Thus the level of spending in the previous year is irrelevant and the percentage change in discretionary spending from the previous year is also irrelevant.

What is relevant; Discretionary spending in Reagan's first budget -- FY 1982 -- was 10.1% of GDP. Non-DOD discretionary spending as a percentage of GDP in Reagan's first year was 4.4%. Discretionary spending in Bush's first budget -- FY2002 -- was 7.1% of GDP. Non-DOD discretionary spending as a percentage of GDP for Bush's first year was 3.7% and that doesn't even include increased Homeland Defense type spending which is higher under Bush than it was under Reagan.

Fortunately, the rhetorical games didn't prevent you from understanding the point of the chart any more than they will prevent understanding on anyone else's part..

The chart is decepetive for two reasons;

First, the increases in 2002 discrestionary spending over 2001 discretionary spending are due to Homeland expeditures.

Second, Reagan in his sole judgement spent more on discretionary non-DOD than Bush. That's what discretionary spending means.

You identify as "rhetorical games" that which you don't understand.

[meema]

? Your hotlink on #161 doesn't work for me!

I'm enjoying this thread, and especially posts like yours. W's immigration plan was the last straw for me. I've gone through all sorts of emotions as each plan/program is pushed by our conservative Republican President. Going from a broken glass, praying voter to this sad depressed senior citizen, who NEVER voted for a democrat in my life...

[BigSkyFreeper]

The GOP Congress is gutless to itself and the president, so you're going to keep the gutless wonders in Congress and elect a long shot to the White House?

[BigSkyFreeper]

Ah, so you're going from moderate to radically liberal. There's a nice thought. /sarcasm

[NittanyLion]

Without reading the thread, let me guess that some people here think this is bad news, and fear that the President might actually become more conservative in response, and that he "needs" to run as a liberal "in order to be reelected" (all polls to the contrary be darned).

Wow - that's eerie.

Oh wait, the same melodrama is played out on this forum everyday. Nevermind...

[FreeReign]

And we aren't even touching entitlements yet where Reagan actually proposed and enacted numerous spending reductions, mainly by slowing growth rates, while Bush has strongarmed a huge, unfunded expansion of Medicare through the Congress.

Mandatory entitlements which now includes the president's new perscription drug entitlement is a BIG problem.

The only way to resolve this problem is through privatization of both Medicare and social security.

We stand a better chance of privatization with the president and the R congress than we do with any D's involved. And it can be done under the guise of the president caring about seniors.

I hope it happens. It's our only chance. I make no guarantees that it will happen.

[Petronski]

Really Manly Elves?

I sure am glad you're around to post stuff like this, Laz. LOL

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

Good news. Seems our voices are being heard after all.

Are you sure? These people are so out of touch that this could have actually been a heated discussion about expense accounts and their house servants immigration status.

[NittanyLion]

And y'all sat out one election too many. You ain't the base anymore. Bush isn't going to stick your neck out for him after y'all voted in smaller numbers in 2000 than you did in 1996.

I'm sorry to see the advice I provided up in 294 is going to go unheeded. I realize it may feel good to make these pronouncements, but surely you realize this divisiveness actually damages the cause you support. Right?

IMHO, it seems you're putting self-gratification above responsible governance. I've seen you make some great, substantive posts with which no one can argue. Why you'd resort to this bickering when you clearly have so much more potential is beyond me.

Like I said earlier, no one can change what conservatives did to you to make you so jaded. I'd apologize on their behalf, but I didn't do those things and I'm sure it would ring hollow. But for your own sake, don't resort to the tactics you say alienated you in the first place.

[Lazamataz]

So, if I support the President's immigration reform plan, I'm all for undercutting market rates and squeezing Americans from the labor market?

Pretty much.

Plus you are for illegals raping our women, driving uninsured and uninspected vehicles, doing home invasions, and dealing drugs.

[Poohbah]

We all stayed home? All of us?

Not all--but more than enough to make the price of your vote too high for anyone to pay, especially when coupled with a very weak track record of loyalty.

You don't need or want any of our votes?

Not at the price that's being asked.

Right now, GOP election calculus reads that getting votes from the "true conservatives" costs more votes from less-than-true conservatives than the "true conservatives" deliver.

Start delivering more votes than you cost elsewhere, and do so consistently and reliably, and you're liable to get listened to a lot more.

Execute a third-party tantrum over every slight, real and imagined...and watch the GOP go court someone else's vote, because you're telling them that you cannot be relied on in any way, shape, or form.

[Bikers4Bush]

I never said that now did I? I'm holding all local, state and federal republicans to the same standard.

I can only control my votes for the president, my senators and my state rep at the federal level. I am not responsible for the rest of the idiots that currently reside in DC.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I can only control my votes for the president, my senators and my state rep at the federal level. I am not responsible for the rest of the idiots that currently reside in DC.

I'm aware of that. I'm in a conundrum everytime a Senator is up for re-election. The last time I was going to vote for a true Conservative, Max Baucus played the homophobe card and portrayed Mike Taylor as a flaming gay, which he wasn't. Neither one of the sitting Senators from my state earned my vote, I voted for Mike Taylor, as did every other true Conservative in Montana's off year election in 2002 while voting for Bush as POTUS in 2000. Nobody can blame me for having a Congress that can't stand up to the president, by allowing the Democrats to control Congress as if they were the majority party. We're not going to get what we want if we throw Bush out of the White House while keeping the gutless wonders in Congress.

[My2Cents]

Precisely. Which means that Bush didn't propose his immigration reform plan for political expedient reasons.

[My2Cents]

I agree with you. And I'm glad they vented their objections behind closed doors instead of before the world, where the liberal media would be showing the video clips for the next nine months.

[Eva]

The Wall Street Journal has been running articles by various Republicans on this subject but they aren't on Opinion Journal, so I can't post them.

[My2Cents]

Good point! The first place these well-meaning congressmembers can start is sacrificing their annual district wish-lists piled onto the yearly transportation bill.

[Bikers4Bush]

"We're not going to get what we want if we throw Bush out of the White House while keeping the gutless wonders in Congress."

We also won't get what we want if he continues his present course and doesn't repair some of the damage he's already caused.

Either way, in my opinion, we're screwed.