Things I don’t miss about George W. Bush (Michelle Malkin)

Michelle Malkin ,com ^ | February 9, 2010 | Michelle Malkin

[sickoflibs]

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but someone has to do it.

The “Miss Me Yet?” billboard (inspired by Jonathan Maney’s t-shirts) is cute. But let’s not get carried away with nostalgia.

President Bush put America on the proper war footing after 9/11 and deserves much credit for doing so, but he also:

1) joined with open-borders progressives McCain and Kennedy to try to force shamnesty down our throats;

2) massively expanded the federal role in education;

3) championed the Medicare prescription drug entitlement using phony math;

4) kowtowed to the jihadi-enabling Saudis;

5) stocked DHS with incompetents and cronies;

6) pushed Hillarycare for housing;

7) enabled turncoat Arlen Specter;

8. nominated crony Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court;

9) pre-socialized the economy for Obama by embracing TARP, the auto bailouts, the AIG bailout, and in his own words:

“I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.” – George W. Bush

No, I don’t miss having a corporate socialist Republican in the White House any more than I like having a corporate socialist Democrat in the White House now.

[A.Hun]

After all the huge manatee expansion of the federal government

I wish ya'll would quit saying that...its not true.

I'm getting tired of doing it, but I'll post it again...

Bush’s tax cuts caused the majority of the deficit, but it did what was intended, getting us out of recession. At least he did the right thing by cutting taxes instead of doing a trillion dollar porkulus.

Also, Bush never had more than 18% of the budget to cut. The rest was defense, interest on the debt, and entitlements. What cuts he asked for, were mostly blocked by the Democrats, although he did get some budget cuts every year except the last two IIRC (even though the budget increased).

Yes, he did increase spending on defense, but it was badly needed. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost, but they were only about 5% of the budget annually. He also was responsible for NCLB and Medicare part D, but both have been successes. NCLB forced teachers to prove they were educating kids (that is why teachers to a person hate NCLB), and Medicare part D has come in 40% under budget. Both were campaign promises that he kept, and both were far less expensive than the Democrat’s proposals.

For the last three months of his term, he believed he had no choice but to bailout the financials with TARP. He also had to work with Pelosi to get anything passed at all. I was not happy with the authorization to bail out Wall Street, but it worked. It prevented a catastrophe. We didn’t know at the time of the $550 billion dollar run on our money markets, but the President did. FWIW, of the 700 billion authorized, there is about 250 billion outstanding, and more will be paid back if Obama allows it. Bush believed he had no choice, and I agree. I understand though, why many do not.

When you add in the challenges from Enron and the dotcom bust, 9/11, all of the natural disasters under his term (and there were a bunch of them...five hurricanes including Katrina in 2005 alone), and the war on terror, and the financial collapse, GWB and the Republicans actually were conservative in their spending, even though the debt doubled in eight years (5 Trillion).

In fact, because of GWB’s business friendly policies of holding down taxes and regulations, our GDP grew rapidly enough to keep government spending in the 18.5-20.5% of the GDP, below average for the last thirty years. If not for the real estate collapse, our budget would have been balanced in 2008...it almost made it in 2007. The debt to GDP held steady at about 60% of GDP, about the same as 1990-1996.

It is mostly the paulites that keep tagging GWB as such a huge spender, but they are wrong. They discount the fact that for six years Democrats voted as a block against everything Delay and Bush tried to do with the budget, and the incredible demands on the government in the same time period.

On the other hand, Obama’s spending (just in the budget) may exceed 35% of GDP. He may well double the debt in his first term (10 trillion). There really is no comparison between the massive spending we are seeing now, and the previous administration’s. Unfortunately, Republicans voting as a block cannot affect Obama’s budgets, as the Dems (with the help of a few RINOs) could GWB’s.

Tom Delay told conservatives that Republicans did the best they could, and it was the truth. With Obama and the Democrats having shown their true colors on spending the last three years, it is time to quit trying to paint GWB and the Republicans spending as somehow the same. It wasn’t, and it is easy to prove. A good example is conservative’s throwing Republicans under the bus for $44 billion in earmarks, about 2% of the budget in 2005. In place of them, we have Pelosi who won’t even talk about earmarks, and a porkulus bill that will spend $300 billion on exactly the same type of projects. 44 billion was not an exorbitant amount, it was just presented that way as a Democrat talking point.

Certainly spending was far higher than what libertarians would prefer, but now we need to acknowledge the realities of the Bush Administration’s fiscal policy.

This theme keeps coming up, and it only helps Obama cover the staggering amount of spending he and the Dems are doing, spending that will destroy our country.

Here are the links to back this info up.

Bush’s tax cuts caused the majority of the deficit,

Economy Pays Price For Bush Tax Cuts.

Their conclusions were totally wrong as proven by the explosion in revenue in 2005-2008, but their numbers on the revenue loss until 2004 are valid.

and entitlements

Bush never had more than 18% of the budget to cut.

although he did get some budget cuts every year except the last two

Google Search

I couldn't find one link that lists them all, but most are in the google search.

he did increase spending on defense, but it was badly needed

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost, but they were only about 5% of the budget annually.

list of budgets

Cost Of War

897,000,000,000 war cost divided by 20,359,000,000,000 budgets from 2002-2009= 4.4%

Medicare part D has come in 40% under budget.

Medicare Part D Comes In Under Budget

We didn’t know at the time of the $550 billion dollar run on our money markets,

2008 TARP bailout was prompted by fears of 5 Trillion dollar bank run

there is about 245 billion outstanding, and more will be paid back

SacBee

even though the debt doubled in eight years (increase of 5 Trillion).

Notice it tripled under Reagan, and nearly doubled under Clinton.

our GDP grew rapidly enough to keep government spending in the 18.5-20.5% of the GDP,

If not for the real estate collapse, our budget would have been balanced in 2008

The debt to GDP held steady at about 60% of GDP, about the same as 1990-1996.

There really is no comparison between the massive spending we are seeing now, and the previous administration’s.

[ohioWfan]

OH! I just saw that you pinged the groupthink gang to help you out of the jam you got yourself in. Begging for help,complete with group attacks and ambush? Not too brave, are you?

I guess that means I'm outta here, sick. Your gang-up method is dirty and childish and very passe'. I'm going to leave before the posse arrives....

Bye, lib. :)

[A.Hun]

This whole crew has Palin in their sights....she’s a Republican with a chance to win.

They hate her.

[ohioWfan]

Yep. And it certainly exposes who “they” are, doesn’t it?

[sickoflibs]

Your personal attack and then cry to the teacher for help as victim is getting old. Get a dog!

[A.Hun]

You said she wasn’t qualified.

Exactly what are the qualifications to be a SCJ?

[ohioWfan]

Hmmmm.........back to the pathological stuff now, eh?

btw, I heard a rumor that you've been called a troll by someone much more significant than I am. LOL!

(Now before you call me a liar for not ignoring you, I'm going to ignore you..............troll).

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


Michelle is pretty ... but, in this case ... "very, very" incorrect ...


Patton-at-Bastogne


.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”The problem with Dubai was it was the ONLY time I ever heard that idiot threaten to veto legislation. After all the huge manatee expansion of the federal government and he was going to exercise his weenie pen over that. It was another stupid hill to die on.

Was Dubai after Harriet Myers? I remember those were the first two Bush second term screwups. It got worse after those. I agreed with Dubai as policy but was amazed by Bush's mishandling of it. He tried to sneak it through and could not explain it.

As far as Dubai as a policy I have always found Cavuto as very rational and serious and he and Rush explained how the new deal called for Dubai to add a number of security procedures for free that the Teamsters would charge a fortune for. But the radio lynch mod characterized it as selling our ports to the terrorists, which made no sense. Bush was no place explaining it.

[sickoflibs]

You have never posted anything factual. It’s either “I love you” or “You are bad” all personal emotions.

[Brimack34]

I am tired of her sites and their BDS and PDS. Get over yourself Malkin you missed the point. Ands while your at it fir allah.

[sickoflibs]

You are trolling this post troll, you have no point.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I hear what she's saying but given Michelle's Morton's Fork scenario, I'll go with the security guy every time.

I don't see GWB and Obama as that distinct. GWB paved the way for Obama, and even stopped arresting illegal aliens before the elections so that Obama's illegal aunt would not be an embarassment. For Obama or himself.

[A.Hun]

He tried to sneak it through and could not explain it.

No he didn't. It was handled by a committee responsible for those policies. Until Schmuckie Schumer started screaming about it, it was handled as routine.

[ZULU]

Nobody is perfect.

I know Reagan was a Democrat. But he had the wisdom to see the error of his ways and grow to reach the Political Truth.

George on the other hand became more and more of a “compassionate” conservative with every day in office until he finally developed the strength of character of a chocolate eclair (thank you T.R. - ANOTHER GREAT Republican the Bushes aren’t fit the clean the shoes of).

[ohioWfan]

Factual.....

To: sickoflibs

B/S. Troll.

8 posted on Saturday, February 06, 2010 11:14:47 PM by Jim Robinson (JUST VOTE THEM OUT! teapartyexpress.org) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

LINK

I'm done. Good bye, troll.

[sickoflibs]

You never posted one single factual point. Personal attack after personal attack. Next will be calling the moderator.

[A.Hun]

Having voted for and been proud of both men, of course neither were perfect.

Reagan gave up on cutting government and spent the last two years of his term tangled in Iran-Contra.

If you hold both men to the same standard, you can’t support one and not the other. Bush was every bit as conservative as Reagan.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Not so fast! According to GWB's budget, 2009 manadatory spending was $1.89 T (up 6.2%), not 2.5T. Where did you get the 2.5T?

[ohioWfan]

You posted that to the wrong person. Check your link and find the right guy to post that to.