A Dime's Worth Of Difference? (Liberal Republicans Say "NON!" To Tax Cuts)

OpinionJournal.com ^ | 7/11/04 | Pete Du Pont

[goldstategop]

An important and serious argument is going on in Washington about whether taxes on Americans' incomes should stay where they are or dramatically rise, and whether government spending should continue its accelerating growth. We know what Democrats think. They despise tax cuts and believe government spending should be higher. Washington Republicans, on the other hand, are unsure of themselves. They used to be for lower taxes and smaller government; now they seem to want bigger spending even if it means higher taxes, abandoning Reagan conservatism for '60s liberalism. In other words, this is a battle for the heart of the Republican Party; the outcome matters, and it seems to be in doubt. With the help of three liberal Republicans (Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island), and one who should know better (John McCain of Arizona), the Senate, with 51 votes, adopted a rule that if passed in the House will end all the Bush tax cuts and ensure that no new ones are enacted.

[nopardons]

For the second time................there is no " posse",nobody "called" anyone,the political REALITY is that though we have a so-called majority in the Senate,we really don't,there IS a war on,and what you claim to want,can't be accomplished in the time frame you want it,if ever.

[Tamzee]

Here's another excellent list... I won't post it within the thread here because it's also LONG.

Bush's Pro-Life Record as of May 18, 2004, by Fr. Peter West

[Reagan Man]

The thread was doing just fine until you came along and disrupted it. If you want to cause trouble, go over to DU and get the Librats all riled up.

As for advancing conservatism. That's something you know nothing about. Absolutely nothing.

[nopardons]

No,that is what happens when there is no great depression,nor a panic,to bring down prices.What things cost has just about NOTHING whatsoever to do with whether we're on a gold standard or not.

The USA was on a gold standard in the 1870s and the 1890s.Both eras saw great ups and downs in pricing,as did the first few decades of the 20th century.

Gold had almost nothing at all to do with prices;depressions,bubbles,and panics did though.And federal income taxes were not to blame either,in the 1870s,nor the 1890s.

There is nothing constitutional about linking taxes and YOUR "feelings" about whether or not the government is adhering to the Constitution or not.

Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh! FACTS MATTER...REALLY THEY DO!

[b9]

Thank you so much. I hadn't seen that.

[Reagan Man]

>>>For the second time................there is no " posse",nobody "called" anyone...

Say it all you want. Most FReepers know better.

Now, if you want to debate the topic of the thread, fine. Otherwise, disrupting the debate of the subject matter will not be tolerated. Period.

[nopardons]

ROTFLMSLO!

Same old MO and it doesn't work. :-)

[Capitalism2003]

Reagan vetoed 40 spending bills in his first term, and proposed actual cuts in spending. With Bush, the democrats propose a 20% increase...he asks for 10%, and considers it a "victory" when we "only" get a 12.5% annual increase in government.

He is no conservative.

[nopardons]

I bookmarked it.It's even longer than that one.I'll see if I can unearth it and let you know what thread it was one.:-)

[nopardons]

I remember that one...it's good too.

[Reagan Man]

>>>Same old MO and it doesn't work.

When you have something relevent to bring to the debate, PING me. I'll be around. Until then, carry on ms.chaos.

[jnarcus]

Not a problem for you then because If Bush doesn't win in November you will really get the biggest government with the least amount of prtoection from terrorists that the world has ever seen...To prefer Kerry (which by not supporting Bush that is in essence what happens) is suicidal. Note that military spending has been one of the largest increases in spending...since Clinton gutted the military during his term, Bush has to spend some to get us back on track

[nopardons]

Yes,most FREEPERS do know and that's why they avoid you and your doom&gloom buddies like the BLACK PLAGUE and don't bother to engage you in debate.

There is NO "posse" called by Tamsey.

I have and AM discussing the topic;unlike you.

And you show up on EVERY single "good"/positive Bush thread to disrupt it,yet have the gall to use that tagline. LOL

[Tamzee]

The thread was doing just fine until you came along and disrupted it. If you want to cause trouble, go over to DU and get the Librats all riled up. As for advancing conservatism. That's something you know nothing about. Absolutely nothing.

In other words, you guys were having fun on your poisonous joy-ride and I didn't have the right to disagree. And yet you claim that I'm the one who belongs on DU... got it LOL

You have vicious leftie debate tactics down to an art form, dear, and this thread is case in point.

[nopardons]

Fine...........have it YOUR way and go vote for Kerry.That'll get you exactly what you want...right? :-)

[b9]

Wow. Not only smart, but a Californian, to boot. :-)

[nopardons]

Just keep on keeping on...facts don't mean a thing to you.

[Tamzee]

Thanks, I'd love to see the updated version... was it done by Southack again?

[nopardons]

No......somebody used his and added to it.

It's too late to look right now,but I do promise to do the scut work and FREEPmail the info to you.

[jnarcus]

Thank you for your graphic...that is exactly why the spending is up...and ANYONE paying a half a gnat's worth of attention would know that. These purists miss the point completely as far as I can tell. Won't make a wits worth of difference if there is no coutry left after the next attack that we can't stop because our military is underfunded