Actions Speak Loudest: Who's the more fiscally conservative, Clinton or Bush?

National Review Online ^ | August 8, 2002 | Veronique de Rugy

[EveningStar]

President Bush may be repeating the sins of his father. Although elected on a Reaganesque, tax-cutting platform, he has veered left. President Bush has signed a bill to regulate political speech, issued protectionist taxes on imported steel and lumber, backed big-spending education and farm bills, and endorsed massive new entitlements for mental-health care and prescription drugs. When the numbers are added up, in fact, it looks like President Bush is less conservative than President Clinton.

[MoJo2001]

President Clinton seems more conservative because he didn't have a WAR ON TERRORISM. President Bush has had to make some very difficult situation. On the one hand, we have people complaining about civil liberties being discarded. On the other hand, we have people who are terrified about another attack. President Bush has to do the best he can to help us. The budget numbers that were given did not take the cost of war into account.

Thanks to Bill Clinton..we now have to defend our country from faceless, nameless, and cowards who would attack our country because he was getting serviced in the White House. What a disgrace for all those idiots that voted for him.

[Owen]

This is critical. Conservatives apparently have as much acceptance of this reality to assimilate as do liberals. Having a pure conservative society has no value if society is erased and replaced with a radioactive crater. Having low taxes and pro-Life justices and school vouchers and all the other litmus tests du jour matter not a whit if everyone glows in the dark.

This is exactly the same rationale that must be pounded onto the liberals when they try to engender their own grassroot enthusiasm. Kids having great schools and higher test scores won't matter if the schools are rubble. Abortion on demand is a pretty silly priority if the cities where the clinics are have their population erased by nerve agents. Total prescription drug coverage for Medicare isn't very compelling and compassionate if the drugs won't cure smallpox.

Everything takes a backseat to the war on terror. It has to. There is no society to become conservative or liberal if the population is dead.

[Satadru]

If Bush had to spend a few billions more on defense and on homeland security, then why not cut other spending, like on education, HHS, housing, etc. Bush wants to have his cake and eat it too. We are spending 2 trillion dollars on the federal govt. That is nuts! I understand the need to spend 200 billion extra on defense/homeland security, but that money ought to come from other wasteful govt spending, and not from additional spending by the govt.

[EveningStar]

Bush is not a convervative. He never was. He's a moderate. I knew this when I voted for him. I preferred him to Gore. Period.

[Mr. Mojo]

I understand the need to spend 200 billion extra on defense/homeland security, but that money ought to come from other wasteful govt spending, and not from additional spending by the govt.

Exactly.

[steve50]

If we want all these programs, from farm subsidies to the WOT, we should be willing to pay for them as we go. They have my grandchildren far enough in debt already.

[MoJo2001]

I agree with you both!! I do believe that funding for such assanine things as the breeding practices of Grasshoppers are absolutely insane. Also, HHS will need the money to make sure their are vaccines and other defensive assets to ward off any biological or nuclear attack. God willing it will never come to that. As for the HUD factor, I absolutely agree. It should be cut. As should the Department of Education..but hey..that's me!!! Also, abolish the IRS.

Owen, I agree with you as well. There is no need to worry about this or that if we aren't going to be around to use it!! Defense comes first!

[pittsburgh gop guy]

Yawn.

[EveningStar]

Don't let me keep you up. :)

[michigander]

How Conservative Is President Bush?

[Night Hides Not]

Bingo! And Clinton gave our peace dividend to the Chinese!

[dalereed]

If the Constitution was followed at least 80% of the cost of the federal government would be eliminated.

[EveningStar]

I guess I didn't search as well as I should have before posting. Maybe this time it won't turn into a flame war. LOL.

[RJCogburn]

President Clinton seems more conservative because he didn't have a WAR ON TERRORISM.

That is just the silliest excuse of the day. What does the WOT have to do with the farm bill, the education bill, campaign finance?

These Bush policy decisions make government bigger and more expensive

That is clear.

[Kaslin]

Ping to JohnHuang2

My nomination for "Quote Of The Day"

[Red Jones]

the article is 100% correct

[Satadru]

I would put all the vaccination needs, etc. as part of homeland security. The point is if you are spending more in some areas, cut from others. Bush doesn't want to cut any social programs because he doesn't want to piss off the Democrats. He likes his approval level and would rather spend a few hundred billion of our money to keep him up there. So much for being a conservative.

[FITZ]

President Clinton seems more conservative because he didn't have a WAR ON TERRORISM.

But that's not all of it. Bush has actually proposed giving food stamps to immigrants ---not a conservative idea by a long shot. Clinton at least did sign a welfare reform bill that is supposed to limit the time that can be spent living off the taxpayers. Clinton wasn't a conservative either though.

[FITZ]

Everything takes a backseat to the war on terror.

The war on terror justifies a lot of government spending but not closing open borders where terrorists can come in. Social programs spending is at an all time high, it's Socialism that will likely destroy this country faster than terrorism.