Did Anyone Actually Read Bush's Budget?

TCSDaily ^ | 8 Feb 06 | John Merline

[Small-L]

Does anyone believe that the budget won't be even bigger when the Republicrats in Congress get done padding it for their own special interests?

[randog]

Chirp.......chirp..........chirp.....

[soccer_maniac]

There will be 15,000 special pork projects packed in this one before it's final.

[Brilliant]

"doctors protest budget cuts..."



Oh, that's very persuasive.</sarc>

[Wiseghy]

The MSM seems to be on a real rampage lately in trying to smear Bush. Knight-Ridder ran that piece on State today that was absolutly pathetic.

The trouble comes in when they seem to follow Dem talking point memos to the letter and then plain old make stuff up. Appears they'll do anything to put his approval ratings back in the tank.

[MNJohnnie]

Under Bush, overall federal spending has climbed 20%. And that's after adjusting for inflation. (By comparison, spending climbed 12.7% in real terms during the Clinton years.)

As usually the pseudo Conservative Lieatrairans don't point out how this reflects the growth in mandatory Entitlement spend. Amazing how all these supposed "Fiscal Conservatives" never bother to point out how the problem in the Federal Budget is MANTATORY spending like Soc Security etc. Amazing how they are working so desperately hard to elect Democrats in 2006. Funny how they want a Govt controlled by people who will give them 100% of what they claim to loath.

From their actions it would seem they are NOT at all on our side. So which Move on.org Seminar about spreading disinformation on Conservative Websites did YOU attend SL? Perhaps you should, in the interest of full disclosure, change your name to Slimy Liberal.

[stylin19a]

-- Pres. Bush would spend $4 billion to fight AIDS and HIV globally, a $740 million increase.U.S. foreign assistance, excluding food aid, would rise 14 percent.

Why start cutting domestically ? How about starting with foreign aid ?

[kerryusama04]

After the Republicans have finished killing all the jihadis, Mullahs, and pot-belly dictators, and restored the 2A to its original intent, then we throw them out for the spending. It's a shame that they have decided to give up on the "limited government" schtick, but where would we be with President Kerry and Majority Leader Feinstein? Dying and learning Farsee, that's where.

[satchmodog9]

How can 2.7 trillion have cuts? Any sane person should see through the spin.

[RedStateRocker]

Nah, BOTH parties are guilty of putting' in the pork,

We need to eliminate all 'entitlements'. If it doesn't say it in the Constitution the Government has no business doing it.

Whack all taxes except tariffs and make the government live within that budget.

[raynearhood]

What the hell ever happened to cutting government and limiting spending? Whatever happened to "STOP TAKING MY MONEY"? AAAAAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHH!

I need asprin every time I see a 'conservative' budget.

[Echo Talon]

Education spending is through the roof: Even if Bush does convince Congress to trim back on education spending in 2007, the Department of Education's budget will be 80% bigger than when Bush took office. In the eight years Bill Clinton was in the White House, education spending climbed just 17%.

Clinton likes it when the kids are dumb, it helps to expand the liberal base.

[Teacher317]

Still funny how 8 years of Clinton managed to produce lower percentile increases, whether mandatory or discretionary.

Funny how the spineless GOP Congress managed to do it without the WhiteHouse, and the near-filibuster-proof GOP can't even match their performance.

[afnamvet]

I need asprin every time I see a 'conservative' budget.

You ain't seen anything yet. Wait until this beast meanders its way through congress.

[Phlap]

Three CPAs in Dearborn and a garbageman from Queens.

[goldstategop]

To liberals, a non-existent cut is a cut.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[Small-L]

the problem in the Federal Budget is MANTATORY spending

80% increase in Department of Education is NOT mandatory, especially after 20+ years of promising to eliminate the Dept.

31% increase in the Dept of Commerce is NOT mandatory, especially after 20+ years of promising to eliminate the Dept.

Medicare Drug Coverage was NOT mandatory until the Republicans in Congress passed it.

Increases in Foreign Aid are NOT mandatory.

15000 Pork Barrel projects are NOT mandatory.

BTW, name calling only demonstrates your ignorance and gives you something in common with Dean, Clinton, Gore and Kerry. If you want to argue, do it with facts.

[MNJohnnie]

Funny how your actions do not match your retoric. Sorry but you do not fool anyone. So which Moveon.org seminar did you attend? Or do you work for the DNC directly?

[raynearhood]

Please... stop... you are scaring my kids... and me.

[Small-L]

Clinton likes it when the kids are dumb, it helps to expand the liberal base.

If an 80% increase in Dept. or Ed. funding had improved our schools and the quality of education, I'd be the first one cheering for it. But sadly, No Child Left Behind appears to have done more harm than good, especially when you consider the money being spent by the school systems filling out the paperwork that it required, and the fact that it has diverted attention away from the real problems.