Bush leads country on spending spree.

Detroit News ^ | 12/28/03 | Tony Snow

[jimkress]

When it comes to federal spending, George W. Bush is the boy who can

[Defender2]

WAAAAAA!!!!! DIVIDER!!!! LOSER!!!!

[arete]

When terrorists strike again under a President Hillary or Dean a bigger federal government and Bush's spending will be the least of your worries.

If is wasn't for all the terrorist hype and the war and fear mongering, this administration would be revealed as one of the worst in history.

Richard W.

[sinkspur]

Yep, and you ain't seen nothin yet. Now we got a made up war, the Patriot Act, a contracting economy and budget busting spending. I doubt that we can survive another four years of GW.

See what I mean? No serious person can read these ruttings without bustin' out laughin'!

[Kay Soze]

I will throw my vote away on a third party in order to regain influence over the republican party.

may be 8 years or 16 years from now but the republicans will figure out the CANNOT win with my conservative support.

Or I can vote for W and slowly slide down to full socialism.

I have kids so I have to make every attempt short of picking up arms to stop the BS.

[sinkspur]

If is wasn't for all the terrorist hype and the war and fear mongering, this administration would be revealed as one of the worst in history.

And, if Howard Phillips wasn't fat and ugly, he'd be president, right?

[Defender2]

#24. Another WAAAA!!!! DIVIDER!!!! LOSER!!!!

[beaversmom]

Throw your vote away on Dean or Hillary then and spare us your drivel.

Bush's domestic policies are questionable but he's DAMN sure better than the alternatives.

Hmmm, vote for a third party candidate who doesn't have a snoball's chance and be essentially voting for the Democrat or vote for the person whom I agree with 80% of the time? Guess I'll be making an X next to President Bush's name again. In politics like marriage, life, etc. you don't get perfect fits. You vote for the person who comes the closest to your beliefs who is in the ball game.

Anyway, I agree with your sentiments.

[arete]

than I might as well vote for someone I like.

That's the way I feel about it too. May do a write in.

Richard W.

[deport]

I know you post your articles then run and won't respond or defend them but in any case for all to see who read this thread I ask the following of you to see what plans you and yours have in mind...

What is the CP's plan toward getting the Party in power? Such as:

Getting Congressional Representation to structure National legislation.
Getting 270 Electoral College votes in order to elect a President
Capturing local/state offices/legislative seats
Putting together an organization capable of raising funds to run local/state/national campaigns

I can't see them being much of an impact on the National scene when they got less than 100,000 votes in 2000. It would seem to me they would focus on local to state wide elections as a stepping stone to becoming a National player... Maybe that is their intent, do you know?

[sinkspur]

I will throw my vote away on a third party in order to regain influence over the republican party.

Here's another one. Kay, you actually think this kind of thing works?

[alloysteel]

If we had some ham, we could have ham and eggs, if we have some eggs....

Might go for biscuits too, but we don't have any of them either.

[Sabertooth]

They're for the malcontents to rally around to high-five each other like high-school sophomores.

"Malcontent" is the epithet by which those who wield it avoid "content."

You've got your own high-fives and barnyard cheers at the rival school.

There's no War on Terror in their small-minded worlds.

There's a War on Terror, so we are stuck with President Bush.

Does that mean, however, we're stuck with every wrong-headed, profligate bit of domestic stategery he offers?

Is it our job, as citizens, to simply shut up and vote?

[deport]

I know it's your aim to destroy President Bush as evidenced by your own words... but here's a few of them for all to see....

Jimkress quote

From this point on I will publicly oppose your position as President. I will actively work against your re-election attempt - due primarily to your decision to impose an untouchable political aristocracy upon your constituents. I will do all in my power to assure that neither you nor your progeny will ever again subvert and corrupt the freedom given us by God and protected by the blood of our citizens.

You have earned the enmity of all who love liberty and resist tyranny. You have made it clear you represent the same evil that gave the world Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler. You have subverted liberty. You have imposed tyranny upon your constituents.

May God have mercy on your soul.

[tbpiper]

Support the US Constitution Party.

So full of it, it ought to be called the US Constipation Party. Take a laxative, you'll feel beter.

[Kay Soze]

Yes I think it works.

Also citing the war on terror as the ONLY issue that seperates the dims from repubs and conservatives leads me to think you liked FDR.

He was not afraid to to use the military while growing the govt as well.

[Defender2]

I will be voting, unfortunately this time by absentee ballot. As once again I am overseas fighting terrorists. I will vote for President George W. Bush!!!!

[FreeReign]

Unlike Ronald Reagan, who defined his presidency by means of large, concrete goals — curbing spending growth...

Reagan's discretionary spending as a percentage of GDP for his first three years in office was 10.1%, 10.1% and 10.3%. Bush's discretionary spending as a percentage of GDP was 6.5% in 2001 and 7.1% in 2002. The 2003 figure is still incomplete.

So, 10% of your paycheck was going toward federal discretionary spending during the first 3 years of Reagan. For Bush the figure is 7% of your paycheck going toward federal discretionary spending and that includes a very expensive WOT!

Freedom is truth!

[tbpiper]

Excellent post!

I'll say. Great place to dump old dog poop.

[raptor29]

"I doubt we can survive another four years of GW"?

One reason libertarianism is a pipedream is that no administration gets to 'start from scratch', just clear the slates and start all over. You inherit the messes from prior administrations, and you do your best to operate within and around those messes and make the best of it. Bush inherited government deficit spending, he didn't invent it. We have to win the incrementalism game and to do so, we can't have a Dean or a Clinton win this next election. So some distasteful spending is implemented to help ensure Bush's reelection and undermine the opposition party which played far and away the bigger role in the 'messes' mentioned above. We'll try to make some strides in the coming years.