My point was this. Bush is good when it comes to talking the talk on certain domestic issues like Social Security reform. But he loses credibility with folks and specifically with conservatives, when he then turns around and signs off on the biggest government program since Medicare itself was created in 1965 under liberal Democrat LBJ. The Medicare Prescription Drug Program has pushed America closer to our Euro-socialist cousins and that is not the direction we should be headed. The Founding Fathers wanted this great nation to have a limited government. PresBush and the GOP Congress have expanded the federal bureaucracy like no US government in 40 years. Maybe in our entire history. It's time for some fiscal sanity in WashDC. Reagan advanced the first conservative Presidency since Coolidge. Gingrich gave us the first GOP Congress in 40 years. Now we have a GOP POTUS and a GOP Congress, yet after five long years, they can't get a damn thing done on domestic spending issues. Not to mention immigration reform. I call that pathetic leadership.
I am sorry...I only responded to the insult I felt that you assumed I was dumb enough to think that putting this in his Budget meant it was going to happen.
As far as the rest is concerned...it happened, get over it. I never said Bush was perfect...and that I agree with all that was done.
I think his biggest mistake...was going to Washington after getting elected and thinking that he had to PROVE something...and he tried TOO hard and swayed too far left.
His immigration reform plans...I don't have a clue why he is being so stubborn on the "guest worker program" aside from being realistic in some regards...and also practical in knowing that REAL reform would never happen anyway because of the hugh voting bloc that the Hispanic population has become...
I don't know...and I am disappointed...I HATE his stance on immigration and border control.
But, it doesn't make him a moron, or a failure.
Haven't read the article have you.
Last year, even though Bush talked endlessly about the supposed joys of private accounts, he never proposed a specific plan to Congress and never put privatization costs in the budget. But this year, with no fanfare whatsoever, Bush stuck a big Social Security privatization plan in the federal budget proposal, which he sent to Congress on Monday. His plan would let people set up private accounts starting in 2010 and would divert more than $700 billion of Social Security tax revenues to pay for them over the first seven years. If this comes as a surprise to you, have no fear. You're not alone. Bush didn't pitch private Social Security accounts in his State of the Union Message last week.
In short, the meat of the article is that he didn't talk about it. Then inserts specifics quietly under the radar for such a program. Kind of hard to turn off conservatives by talking big and not delivering, huh, when he didn't talk about this move in the SOU this year.
The rest of your post is tiresome rhetoric. Oh, there is a point to be made about expansion of the Government, but then Bush never claimed he was a small government type of guy when he ran for election. I realize some hold him in contempt for this, but I don't. He's upfront about who he is and what he intended. Any disappointment belongs to the person that believed they could try to change him. I know what I elected, overall on balance? I'm happy with who I elected. But I'm not going to throw my hands up in anger that G.W.B. hasn't morphed into a small Government type of guy because conservatives demanded he do so. That's completely absurd.
Though, he IS serious about S.S. reform. This under the radar submission is proof of it. If the Reps had the guts to act on it in the other branches, he would be limiting the scale of Government in a historical manner. And small government types would get an unexpected gift from the President who didn't make substantive promises he'd do anything but reform government, certainly not scale it back.
Now I do think there is some cause for anger over spending in Washington. Especially toward the '94 class still around. Toward the President, he's made no secret he supports spending to a degree such as with AIDS, charitable organizations and so on. But he has made rhetorical claims towards controlling spending as well, which does give Fiscal conservatives actual move for complaint. To a degree he's embraced the notion of fiscal discipline, raised hopes, and hasn't delivered with use of a VETO. On that, yeah, scream as much as you want. It's open for critisism. he's made it open to critisism.
As for myself, I'm pleased he submitted proposals for S.S. reform in the budget even if Dems, RINO's and cowardly Reps will gut it. Just as I was happy he attached a signing affidavit to the McCain bill. At least it's evidence he's fighting back for a change domestically. As well as acknowledgement the RINO's/Libs will never allow many domestic conservative victories that are focal points of attention to the people. The only shot he has is to do it quietly, to attempt to keep politics out of it. Won't work, but it's a legitimate attempt.
There is one saving grace in the Prescription Drug Program. One.
Buried deep within the bill are Medical Savings Accounts -- one of the things that can help solve the healthcare issue.
They slid thru under the radar, just as the Private Accounts for Social Security are being handled.