Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: George W. Bush; sultan88; jla; FBD; Landru; Dubya; FreeTheHostages; Pippin; KQQL
"I don't want to look smug. But as I mentioned to Slim, we would have had the 4% or greater increase if we conservatives hadn't started raising literal holy hell about the spending."

Smugness be damned, the fight's far from won!! We've gotta continue to raise holy hell 'cuz you know the Big-Spending Lib'rals will be!!

"In a budget this size, we're talking tens of billions, probably hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 5-10 years."

Yep...that's the main reason we gotta continue to insist that we address the outta-control spending in generalities, 'cuz otherwise the Lefties will deride every cut as "You're only saving $1 Billion here or half-a-billion there" when us lowly taxpayers know that $500 Million does actually natter!!

"That's pretty worthwhile if all we had to do was rattle their cages."

We must continue to rattle their cages...in fact, we oughtta be bracing ourselves to pick up the pace in said rattling, or else the pro-Big-Spending special interests will end up drowning us out in this debate!!

"As far as the real import of Bush's announced 0.5% budget increase, I think it shakes out like this: Bush's budget was already in some trouble with top House and Senate budget folks. They didn't like the smell. He was already promising them behind the scenes that they could cut spending next year. But they weren't happy with that, nervous about the base. Still, they were willing to go along with it if there was no opposition."

Even amongst the most loyal Pro-Bush folks on this Forum, I've detected a distinct displeasure with his willingness to grow the Federal Leviathan at such an undisciplined pace. Many have been unwilling to "undercut" a man they genuinely respect and want to see succeed, but they are still uncomfortable seeing BigGuv'ment grow soo fast under a Republican Administration.

"Rove was strategizing, telling them that Bush would take all the heat off them by having proposed the budget and they'd get off scott-free with the voters. But they remember past elections and how conservatives ejected the Dims in '94 and they also recognize that Clinton got more popular and more secure in his position with the Congress in enemy hands."

Rove may be too smart by half, IMHO.

"Being smart politicians, they recognized that Bush may no longer need them at all after he is re-elected. And he'll be lame duck next year anyway so he'll be of less use to the GOP Congress than he has been up to now. Now, add all that up, and you can see that the fury over this budget gave the House/Senate a good reason to do what they already wanted to do. So they called up Rove and politely told him the 4% increase version of the budget was DOA."

I pray you are correct in yer assumption, my FRiend. However, I believe it is more likely that the POTUS got a feel fer the general displeasure of the voting populace before the Congress even had the opportunity to weigh in!!

Rove, alarmed, cut it back to 0.5% but, given the level of anger over this from the fully roused conservative base (led by Rush and some neo-cons and with Liberty Caucus plotting at a private location), Rove came up with the idea of pledging these spending limits to try to placate the base and keep the GOP Congress from really hacking into this bloated budget. One of Rove's primary objectives is to make sure that Bush is seen as leading the party, not that the party is leading him and, to Rove, this leadership focus is politically more important than the actual size of the budget."

You could be right, 'cuz when yer talking about a $2.3 Trillion budget, you'd be hard-pressed to make the case that any budget priority is "under-funded"!! As to the PowerOfRove, it'll be interesting to look back a genertaion from now and discern exactly how much power the dude has over Dubyuh, but I'm much more inclined to think President Bush can read the tea-leaves himself and sees that losing the RightWing will never serve his ultimate purposes!!

"Seen in this light, the pledge for the spending caps is an attempt to persuade the GOP Congress to at least keep the 0.5% discretionary spending increase in and not cut it by more than that."

You are a cynical one, my FRiend...LOL!! Dubyuh's not his daddy, despite recent evidence to the contrary!!

"More importantly, it keeps Bush 'leading' the party. Not being led by the Congress, or by Rush, or by the conservative base."

Hoo cares who gets credit fer it as long as fiscal discipline is instituted?!

FReegards...MUD

1,157 posted on 01/31/2004 4:47:36 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1151 | View Replies ]


To: Mudboy Slim
Hoo cares who gets credit fer it as long as fiscal discipline is instituted?!

I don't. I'll give Bush all the credit for reining in the runaway spending (that he asked for). Even if I know it's the snarling conservative base that put the fear of the ballot into their craven hides.

Great post there, Mud.
1,170 posted on 01/31/2004 5:56:14 PM PST by George W. Bush (It's the Congress, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1157 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson