To our fiscally challenged liberal and centrist Republican friends, I ask, just whose fault is it that federal spending isn't being reduced? Not Reagan's fault. Not Gingrich's fault eitrher. The fault lies with Bush43 and the majority GOP controlled Congress. The House holds the purse strings. Reagan worked wonders without the GOP controlled House in his corner. Speaker O'Neill and ML Howard Baker worked with Reagan. Bush43 has shown a consistantly liberal approach to spending and bureaucracy.
>>>>>If we just gave back 1/3 of the Bush cuts ...
Frankly, I don't advocate giving back any of the Bush43 tax cuts. Let's have more tax cutting. Lets have real tax reform. A flat percentage income tax would be great. Even a NRST would be better then the tax system we have in place today.
The economy is solid and overall, growth remains substantial. This is a good time to reduce the tax burden on Americans even further. And lets not wait anylonger. This is a good time to reduce federal spending too.
For clarification - are you calling me fiscally challenged?
That statement on no one in DC voting for that big a cut is simply realism. The morons can't seem to pass more "cuts" than just a few billion over 5 years, so why should we believe they'll cut 8% when they haven't been able to limit the rate of increase to under 6% yet? Its not that they shouldn't - its just acknowledging that they won't.
And I'm sure everyone would like to keep all the Bush43 cuts, but without massive spending cuts now (which none of the buffoons will support), we're getting to the point where we'll have to give back a small part just to get back to a balance in a reasonable timeframe.
And I hate to have to disagree, but cutting further now without matching spending cuts that don't rely on overly optimistic assumptions (ie, you have to implement pay-go) is incredibly reckless, as it will drive the already insanely growing deficit and the accompanying interest rates. Implement pay-go, and I'm all for looking at appropriate tax cuts.....