Posted on 03/28/2006 5:01:19 AM PST by Arkinsaw
Why didn't you say so in the first place?
If you said it is a 'fact' that there has been too much spending, then I would agree with you, but you made a general statement that was most certainly NOT a fact.
(Nice try to turn it around on me, though, Tread.........albeit totally unsuccessful).
The factual data at the OMB.
I'm old enough that I no longer know everything.
Hallelujah.
Now now, you know the term "left" in the context I used meant fiscally. And fiscally, you and I agree the admin went left.
Who is Josh Bolten?
Very descriptive article from Stanford Law's alumni magazine:
http://www.law.stanford.edu/publications/lawyer/issues/69/sl69-bolten.pdf
You are right. If only President Bush had immediately fired Minetta he would have had a better chance of being re-elected in 2004.
The factual data at the OMB.
The OMB is all factual data. What particular data facts says we went hard left? How much of the budget is mandatory and how much can be affected by the President?
So sue me.
I am already familiar with Josh Bolton and his work at OMB. However that was a nice article you posted and it filled in some details.
"Josh Bolten" sounds too much like "Josh Bartlett".
I'll give you this one, Tread :)
(But NOT the 'hard left' stuff. "Tax cuts" and "left" are NEVER in the same sentence).
Talk about ignorant. If you don't think the Meirs nomination was a bad choice along with the way Katrina was handled by the Fema head appointed by Bush, then you're the one who is unaware of the problem. Throw in immigration along with high spending, indicates there is a lot of improvement to be made. And pal I'm way to the right of you.
5:30AM to 10:00PM is one kind of day. I thank Andy Card for his service to this country and hoping he catches up on life.
check the tagline
Gotcha' ~ not often on the same threads but I recall.
Thanks for a post that gives some personal insight into the President's new Chief of Staff.
I have to say I was deeply gratified to find that the book hubby and I received as a Christmas gift from his sister is the same book Mr. Bolton has on the coffee table in his office. LOL.
I don't think they're real Freepers.
One of the more intelligent of the DUers could probably pull off a fair imitation for a short while, but eventually their desolute lifestyles catch up with them and they start hitting the keys wrong.
Check the last 100 posts on this guy to see what he's really up to.
This is where many make a mistake.
All conservatives love tax cuts prima facie. However,
1] The tax cuts were skewed against those who suffer the most--those who pay the most taxes. I am not talking about the super rich, but the middle class taxpayers got screwed, and the number of those who don't pay any taxes was increased! But, you, I and all conservatives love tax cuts, in general so thank you GWB for helping us out (temporarily).
2] Here is the key--tax cuts are temporary, spending increases are permanent.
Should the RATs make gains and take the WH, the tax cuts will go way. The way the Republicans have moved left (fiscally), that could happen even if the RATs don't. In Vegas, they make odds on everything, and the bet is (if they have it) that the tax cuts will disappear.
On the other hand, take Education spending. Bush has nearly doubled education spending in just five years. If Education spending were increased at the rate of inflation, the DOE budget would have risen about 15% in five years. Ronald Reagan increased Education 26% in his first five years, but George Bush increased spending over 80% in his first five years--and Reagan had higher inflation!
Now, let's say the Republicans come to their senses and say we are going to roll back the 80% plus increase in DOE and take it back to Clinton's last budget plus the rate of inflation over the last five years. Imagine the civil war from the RATs that would happen if that were proposed.
The point--tax rates come and go. Spending, once it is raised, NEVER reverts back to reasonable levels. They create a "new baseline", regardless of how crazy the spending increase was.
The legacy Bush will leave will NOT be one of tax cuts, since those cuts will be eliminated. I do not doubt that tax rates will be raised to a level HIGHER than they were before the Bush cuts.
The legacy of Bush spending will never leave, just as LBJ never left. Bush created new programs that will never be eliminated. Take the free money for home down payments. Bush has given money to a new program to give free money for home down payments. Do you think a reasonable Congress will do away with that program? This will be an "entitlement" that will never disappear, and will probably see huge increases, once 15 million illegal aliens start grabbing their free money.
What about $15 billion to Africa? Will that be raised to $30 billion or eliminated? The UN will demand that since Bush started that level of funding for the Millenium program, the USA be forced to continue funding it at those levels PLUS.
Remember this point--tax rates are temporary, spending increases are permanent.
Thank you for your input.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.