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

[Sabertooth]

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.

Would you mind posting the source and link, along with the appropriate tables for Carter, Bush 41, and Clinton, so that the folks at home can see the context on which your figures rest?

Just trying to go along with your "Freedom is truth!" dictum, you see.

[sinkspur]

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.

It's not the only thing, but it's a very big thing, and I'm not going to risk the future of my children on a bohunk like Dean or some no-name third-party-one-issuer who'll go back to being a no-name the day after the election.

[FreeReign]

Would you mind posting the source and link, along with the appropriate tables for Carter, Bush 41, and Clinton, so that the folks at home can see the context on which your figures rest?

Just trying to go along with your "Freedom is truth!" dictum, you see.

Wherever it leads...

Link

[sinkspur]

That about sums up the neoconazis. Fabricate a war. Do a bunch of fear and hate mongering, and then trash the constitution while wildly expanding government. Oh yeah, like I'm going to vote republican.

Richard, it is a good thing to hate those who want to kill you.

Should we give Iraq back to Saddam?

[EGPWS]

In each of his three years at the helm, the president has warned Congress to restrain its spending appetites, but so far nobody has pushed away from the table — mainly because the president doesn’t seem to mean what he says.

Although Tony has my utmost respect, I disagree with his 3 year synopsis of Dubya'.

He has, without faltering, meant what he has said and put forth an agenda to achieve what he has said he will achieve, in order of concern.

After all, quote:(paraphrasing) "no terrorist or anyone who harbors them will be safe from our wrath".

Like Dubya's political agenda or not, one cannot say he hasn't been honest with this agenda.

After all, for the first time in decades, the Democratic party is lost for an agenda, their political call heard by few, and is in a total disarray because of it.

Dubya' has my utmost respect for obtaining such a political achievement, which can only be beneficial to the public as a whole.

Business cost's in achieving this? Yes, however much less expensive than continuing on with the status quo and allowing the Democratic party to continue to wield the political power they have in the past.

[arete]

but the failure of the Bush administration to get a grip on Congress and Big Gov policies is becoming a concern that I am at a loss to answer.

The answer is simple. The administration lies to the people while doing the opposite. GW didn't veto EVEN ONE spending bill! Leadership like that I can do without.

Richard W.

[sinkspur]

I love you Bushies though

No you don't. You just signed up today.

It's better to get 80% of what you want than none." True, but I'm not getting 80% with Bush, not even 5%.

Then what are you doing on this forum, newbie?

Not an auspicious start, frenchie.

[Defender2]

#66. WWWAAAAAAAA!!!! Crybaby LOSER!!!!

[vto]

I got a prerecorded phone call from my Republican congresscritter assuring me that he was working very hard with our President to expand Medicare.

That's another straw on the camel.

[raptor29]

2050? It may take that long, who knows? But where is the baseline for your comparison about 'moving to the right'? Where would we be without the 'incrementalism' approach? We have 'incrementally' begun to shift the media bias, due to 'incrementally' making our case over and over again for the past 15-20 years. We have 'incrementally' moved Republicans into the House and Senate, controlling both for the first time in decades. And we still have some 'incremental' advances we need to make in order to get things moving in the right direction. But if we stick to our guns, we can do it. And by the way, we still have our guns because we have 'incrementally' kept fighting for them.

The only way your approach can be successful is civil war, because the upheaval involved in your plan would lead to that. Hey, maybe that's ultimately the only way. But for the time being, we have other, more pressing problems to solve.

[arete]

Should we give Iraq back to Saddam?

That is always the stock question for the sheepsters isn't it? The question should be why did GW lie to invade Iraq in the first place? I expected honor and integrity and we got the same bunch of lying weasels as we had for the last 8 years under Bubba.

Richard W.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

The GOP loyalists/employees ignore every fact in this column as though it does not appear on this thread.

[Defender2]

#69. WAAAAAA!!!!!! Yet another Divider, LOSER!!!!

[Hildy]

The only way you're going to get a President who does everything you want is by running for President yourself.

[sinkspur]

The question should be why did GW lie to invade Iraq in the first place? I expected honor and integrity and we got the same bunch of lying weasels as we had for the last 8 years under Bubba.

Well, if you think Bush lied, then you must want us to let Saddam assume power again. Right?

(BTW, the entire world was convinced Hussein had WMDS, including the French, and that was reason enough to kick his ass.)

[Gunslingr3]

Don't like Bush's spending then pressure your Congresscritters. The last time I looked Congress controls the nation's wallet, not the President.

The Congress passes the spending bills, the president has to sign them. They're both GOP controlled. How much longer before Republican rank and file realize that the GOP is just mouthing the words about fiscal restraint and big government?

[TheCrusader]

"And that is why I, and every American who respects the Constitution and the American way, will not be voting for Bush."

Al Gore respects the Constitution? That a$$hole put the Constitution to the ultimate test when he continuously refused to accept his defeat in Florida and forced the outcome to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. IMO no man ever single-handedly succeeded in dividing our country like Al Gore did. I think President Bush is an honest man who loves the Constitution as much as anyone. These are very difficult times we live in and we'd all like to see a "Savior" in the White House, but until we as individuals bring back God to our country we will continue to see problems. Most of America's problems today are moral or spiritual, not political. But too few understand that.

[vto]

I took a 40 minute, in state, commuter flight to visit relatives. I made the mistake of paying cash, at the terminal in our little town.

TSA flagged me, searched my carry on, my jacket, asked me to remove my boots and belt. wanded me, asked me many questions, one of 'em went outside to write down my license plate.

That's another straw.