Posted on 06/23/2005 9:34:57 AM PDT by LongsforReagan
That line alone hurt to read.
I've said it before and I will say it again - George W. Bush is no conservative.
Maybe things will change when we get Republican majorities in both the house and senate. /sarcasm on
How many posts until - "but we are at war" to defend this nonsense?
The two are opposites, apparently.
Let's see what Clinton did in 8 years, well, uh ... Monica was a freebie, so I guess he saved the taxpayers a bit on that.
Exactly - and holding your nose to vote in RINO McCain or RINO Romney or ....any other RINO will NOT advance the cause of Conservativism. The Clintons can, did, (and will)continue to get elected and do significant damage. The only way to fight back successfully is to elect and support REAL Conservatives not RINOs.
Considering that non-defense discretionary spending has dramatically increased, there is no defense.
" Considering that non-defense discretionary spending has dramatically increased, there is no defense."
Worth repeating.
It's indisputable: Pres. Bush is completely lacking in even cursory mouthing of economic conservative principles, let alone taking even one baby step toward symbolic action to curb expenditures.
But we are at war! :-)
Seriously though, the Republican party has completely lost me at this point.
As far as Pres. Bush is concerned, veto is a guy on the Sopranos.
In a simple word, NO!
When defense and homeland security spending increases are removed, Bush's increases in spending dwarf Clinton's. And infact, there is only 1 president who had a faster rate of growth in discretionary spending. LBJ and his Great Society.
Bush is spending beyond drunken salior status.
G.W. doesn't have to veto. Conservatives control the house and senate.
However, if the non-military spending is so enormous,which it is, why is there so much whining about spending cuts for veterans, education,etc?
Where is all the non-military spending going?
Well we have to remember that there was no war on terror if anything we had a passivity on terror. This alone would cause huge financial costs to spring up
that being said Bush and Congress have increased spending in other areas when in fact they should have been cutting expenditures to compensate
dont get me wrong i think BUsh is a decent guy and the Rs are a heck of a lot better than the Turbin Durbin and Deaniacs can bring about but they should get back to attempting a real cost cutting budget
I printed out and mailed these charts to the National Republican Committee and told them to take me off their mailing lists and email lists:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1400545/posts?page=59#55
I see no reason why anyone should donate to the Republican party. You get a much better bang for your buck and you can be certain it's getting spend on shrinking government with these guys (Club For Growth):
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/why.php
From those charts before it looks like the GOP is doing the opposite of what the people who donate to it want it to do.
A "Two-Party Cartel" virtually run by the elites, gives me no hope of change unless we all vote outside the cartel. GW was no conservative & made it known by his positions before his election. This is why I did not vote for him the 1st time. Again this cartel put up an opposing person that was so far out of his ability that again we had no choice. So as all cartels we get substandard service.
Senate Republicans (of whom very few are conservatives) have the slimmest of majorities. If you think that GOP control of Congress automatically equates with spending control you haven't been paying attention.
Where is all the non-military spending going?
Did you not read the article? If not, here are some excerpts:
"First there was the enactment of the President's education bill, No Child Left Behind. .......in four years, President Bush increased spending at the Department of Education by 98.6 percent. However, instead of being ashamed, Republicans see the increase as an accomplishment."
"Then, there was the farm bill. This bill is best characterized as a bipartisan orgy of special interest politics. ........the budget of the Department of Agriculture is up 40 percent.
"Finally, the Republicans are responsible for the biggest expansion in Medicare since 1965."
$15 billion for African AIDS anyone? The deep-pocketed dictators on the dark continent sure appreciate it.
well in certain respects i agree and in others i do not:
1. Bush is conservative where it matters the most in terms of defense, guns, and tax relief. However spending is not so good and he hedges on a few other issues but AWB did expire which i see as a good thing.
2. Voting for other parties got us Clinton so i am not going to make that mistake and get another Clinton in there in 08.
no worries we can agree to disagree just trying to keep it all pragmatic
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.