Posted on 02/08/2010 6:22:33 PM PST by ButThreeLeftsDo
Internet chatter had led to speculation that it might be an urban myth -- nothing more than clever digital trickery spreading via the Web.
But our friend Bob Collins at Minnesota Public Radio assures us he's seen it with his own eyes:
There is a billboard along I-35 near Wyoming, Minn., with a huge photo of former president George W. Bush and this question: "Miss Me Yet?"
Now, the push is on to find out who paid to have it put up.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
It was trying to remember where it was after seeing it the first time that was the hard.Now, that I have seen it again, I know where to find it.
Only NPR could try and draw that conclusion....you gotta love these libs!!
>>> Who’s Reagan More?
lol... how’s school goin?
Neither he nor his dad was ever a conservative —I can’t believe I’m reading this stuff on FR.
So he’s not nearly as bad as the current creep —does that make W good? I wouldn’t think that in a million years.
A much better comparison would have involved W and John McCain (who is both nutty and also buddies with Ted Kennedy).
This sign is still amusing, sure, and W did do an OK job with the WOT, but does that make him a good President..?
Sheesh..
I am Sparticus.
What crap.
The current occupier of the White House is such a failure that the rats are starting to miss Carter
Yes we do. Well, I do. Who else does or doesn’t?
I missed him at 12:01 pm EST 20 JAN 09
I wonder how much it costs to rent a billboard.
Hahah, awesome.
lol didnt Bush have to deal with Nancy and Harry?
Drove past it last Thursday. Great spot on the freeway, heading south toward the Twin Cities.
I pass that every day on the way to work :)
I guess I will post this again.....
Bush’s tax cuts caused the majority of the deficit, but it did what was intended, getting us out of recession. At least he did the right thing by cutting taxes instead of doing a trillion dollar porkulus.
Also, Bush never had more than 18% of the budget to cut. The rest was defense, interest on the debt, and entitlements. What cuts he asked for, were mostly blocked by the Democrats, although he did get some budget cuts every year except the last two IIRC (even though the budget increased).
Yes, he did increase spending on defense, but it was badly needed. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost, but they were only about 5% of the budget annually. He also was responsible for NCLB and Medicare part D, but both have been successes. NCLB forced teachers to prove they were educating kids (that is why teachers to a person hate NCLB), and Medicare part D has come in 40% under budget. Both were campaign promises that he kept, and both were far less expensive than the Democrat’s proposals.
For the last three months of his term, he believed he had no choice but to bailout the financials with TARP. He also had to work with Pelosi to get anything passed at all. I was not happy with the authorization to bail out Wall Street, but it worked. It prevented a catastrophe. We didn’t know at the time of the $550 billion dollar run on our money markets, but the President did. FWIW, of the 700 billion authorized, there is about 250 billion outstanding, and more will be paid back if Obama allows it. Bush believed he had no choice, and I agree. I understand though, why many do not.
When you add in the challenges from Enron and the dotcom bust, 9/11, all of the natural disasters under his term (and there were a bunch of them...five hurricanes including Katrina in 2005 alone), and the war on terror, and the financial collapse, GWB and the Republicans actually were conservative in their spending, even though the debt doubled in eight years (5 Trillion).
In fact, because of GWB’s business friendly policies of holding down taxes and regulations, our GDP grew rapidly enough to keep government spending in the 18.5-20.5% of the GDP, below average for the last thirty years. If not for the real estate collapse, our budget would have been balanced in 2008...it almost made it in 2007. The debt to GDP held steady at about 60% of GDP, about the same as 1990-1996.
It is mostly the paulites that keep tagging GWB as such a huge spender, but they are wrong. They discount the fact that for six years Democrats voted as a block against everything Delay and Bush tried to do with the budget, and the incredible demands on the government in the same time period.
On the other hand, Obama’s spending (just in the budget) may exceed 35% of GDP. He may well double the debt in his first term (10 trillion). There really is no comparison between the massive spending we are seeing now, and the previous administration’s. Unfortunately, Republicans voting as a block cannot affect Obama’s budgets, as the Dems (with the help of a few RINOs) could GWB’s.
Tom Delay told conservatives that Republicans did the best they could, and it was the truth. With Obama and the Democrats having shown their true colors on spending the last three years, it is time to quit trying to paint GWB and the Republicans spending as somehow the same. It wasn’t, and it is easy to prove. A good example is conservative’s throwing Republicans under the bus for $44 billion in earmarks, about 2% of the budget in 2005. In place of them, we have Pelosi who won’t even talk about earmarks, and a porkulus bill that will spend $300 billion on exactly the same type of projects. 44 billion was not an exorbitant amount, it was just presented that way as a Democrat talking point.
Certainly spending was far higher than what libertarians would prefer, but now we need to acknowledge the realities of the Bush Administration’s fiscal policy.
This theme keeps coming up, and it only helps Obama cover the staggering amount of spending he and the Dems are doing, spending that will destroy our country.
Here are the links to back this info up.
Bush’s tax cuts caused the majority of the deficit,
Economy Pays Price For Bush Tax Cuts.
Their conclusions were totally wrong as proven by the explosion in revenue in 2005-2008, but their numbers on the revenue loss until 2004 are valid.
and entitlements
Bush never had more than 18% of the budget to cut.
although he did get some budget cuts every year except the last two
I couldn't find one link that lists them all, but most are in the google search.
he did increase spending on defense, but it was badly needed
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost, but they were only about 5% of the budget annually.
897,000,000,000 war cost divided by 20,359,000,000,000 budgets from 2002-2009= 4.4%
Medicare part D has come in 40% under budget.
Medicare Part D Comes In Under Budget
We didn’t know at the time of the $550 billion dollar run on our money markets,
2008 TARP bailout was prompted by fears of 5 Trillion dollar bank run
there is about 245 billion outstanding, and more will be paid back
even though the debt doubled in eight years (increase of 5 Trillion).
Notice it tripled under Reagan, and nearly doubled under Clinton.
our GDP grew rapidly enough to keep government spending in the 18.5-20.5% of the GDP,
If not for the real estate collapse, our budget would have been balanced in 2008
The debt to GDP held steady at about 60% of GDP, about the same as 1990-1996.
There really is no comparison between the massive spending we are seeing now, and the previous administration’s.
It’s best to forget about him and to move forward and stick 100% to conservative principles.
Good luck with that...Obama won't let you forget GWB, and no one is 100% conservative.
.
which direction on 35 north or south
everytime i see that photo, i get a “good luck dufuss” out of pres bush, and the “dont f*** up” out the Vp
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.