No, GWB and lackeys Levin+Hannity taught the public that government was free. That You could increase government endlessly and no-one has to pay for it. That’s called magic. So now that everyone in country has their hands out, you say, “Not so fast, I am against that, it's not conservative “, Well too late, you broke the fiscal responsibility lock. You gave Pelosi/Obama the license to steal. Case in point: You all LOVED GWB rebuilding Iraq while cutting taxes and not raising any taxes, all on some kids credit card. But then when the public demanded their handouts, and GWB gave in, you said “I am not for that”But GWB got himself in a corner, he had no basis to say 'NO' once you all told the public you could rebuild Iraq for free.
I dont remember Hannity/Levin going after GWB for NOT promising to cut spending during debate with Kerry. There would be a price for that. Only after he was safely elected.
RE ““Often raising taxes to pay for increased spending is counterproductive because it makes business flee and weakens the economy.”
Really? What if GWB repealed YOUR (and Hannity and Levin) tax cut and then raised your taxes but told you it was to pay for Iraq, for the troops. Would you have fled the country? quit your job? held a tea party? Cut back work hours? No! Really?? Something doesn’t add up here. If so would you still call those against Iraq traitors if YOU were cutting back hours to avoid the Iraq tax?
RE : Cutting taxes reduces price of Govt and helps increase economic growth. specifically tax RATES on production/income/earnings/investment. Proven in history, by basic ECON 101 understanding of how economic incentives work, etc.
That's the problem. Since you (republicans as a group) believe that cutting taxes reduces the cost in government, you always increase spending astronomically when you cut taxes. Only one thing reduces cost in government, cut government. Only one thing stimulates economic growth, cut government. Cutting taxes while increasing government only gives the illusion of growth, but it is only stealing from someone elses future. Yet now that that future is here(2009), (the bills are due), instead of wanting to pay for it politically you claim it’s all non-conservatives debt(not selling). You want to take credit for the party the boom, but point blame for the hangover on others. Then claim it’s a mystery democrats are in charge.
RE :“"There is a night and day difference between cutting taxes and increasing spending.“
Really? If GWB taxes a dollar less of your pay, and spends the same amount, that is still stealing. But he spent two additional dollars, on stuff you so-called conservatives approved.
RE “ Reality is that the fiscal conservatives who pushed for lower taxes are ALSO the ones who consistently stood up for ending earmarks cutting spending and opposing welfare and entitlement expansions. “
Really? fiscal conservatives like GWB? I think the Hannity/Levin bots stood up for re-buiding Iraq without funding it with taxes, like an Iraq tax on YOU,(and Hannity and Levin)
Two logical errors: 1) Conflating President Bush with talk radio show hosts, who express opinions but did not enact the bush policies. Those talk radio show hosts DISAGREED with Bush on MULTIPLE issues, I named several of them. I mentioned Rush - HE OPPOSED BUSH ON TARIFFS IN 2003. HE OPPOSED BUSH WHEN BUSH SIGNED THE BIG-SPENDING PORK FARM BILL (THE DASCHLE BILL) IN 2002. In fact, Rush criticized President on certain things throughout his administration. Your attempt to tie talk radio show hosts to Bush's compromises on spending with Kennedy and Daschle is - bizarre and simply counterfactual.
2) Argument by strawman. It is a complete and utter strawman to claim anyone said 'government was free'. Not bush. Not levin. not anyone. I call BS. Show me the quotes.
And so it is with the whole post. You conflate talk show hosts with WH policy (two different things); you confuse the good tax cuts of 2003 with the flawed spending increases, and you cast the entire conservative movement as somehow complicit in bush's triangulation and compromises. It's a pantload - and we know because WE WERE THERE fighting the good fight AGAINST those compromises. Freepers opposed Medicare Part D WHEN IT HAPPENED. So did almost 2 dozen GOP Representatives. So did talk radio hosts oppose big spending bills.
Take out all your strawmen argumentation and you are simply left with the assertion that Bush was a bigger spender than he should have been ... gee, tell us something new for a change!
You are free to support your phony strawman claims against Levin hannity etc. with names, cites and quotes, its not like they dont have columns and tanscripts. but I am sure you cant because in the end they did have conservative POV and agree or disagree, they have a solid perspective. My own googling shows that RUSH LIMBAUGH OPPOSED MEDICARE PART D WHEN IT WENT DOWN. So did "Club for Growth" and other conservative groups BTW.
And BTW, you do have a very UN-conservative view on tax rate reduction: It reduces the price of Government. Blaming tax cuts for deficits is singing from the Democrat party playbook. ... I repeat: It's a false notion that tax-cutters are responsible or like higher spending /deficits. You can even check the votes - a distinctly DIFFERENT GROUP are voting and did vote for higher spending than for tax reductions. You can verify this by comparing NTU ratings and CAGW (Citizens Against Govt waste). They correlate. Fiscal conservatives like Coburn, DeMint, Rep Flake, Rep Shadegg, Rep Pence voted NO on medicare part D, but have been for lower tax rates. That is consistent fiscal conservatism.