Posted on 07/26/2010 7:06:40 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
As mentioned earlier upthread, September 11 changed everything and the number one priority of the Bush administration was the global war on terror and the defense of the country. He determined that he had to choose his battles with the Dems strategically.
"For the record, every alternative budget offered by the Democrats during the Bush years called for more spending and higher taxes than the President's budget." ... Rove: Courage and Consequence, page 237.
If you're from the camp that thinks that the curatiling the slide of major institutions like Morgan Stanley that were on the abyss of going down like Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual stopped a depression, then you likely think the TARP responsible.
If you're from the camp that thought the US needed banks to fail and bank runs to happen and thousands more small businesses to go out of business ikely jacking up unemployment to at least twice today's levels then I suppose you likely don't view the TARP as responsible.
Politicians coming up through the ranks watch what their seniors are doing. Bush was teaching Democrat ideals to thousands of future Republican leaders.
Check your Constitution. It takes 67 votes in the Senate to override a veto. There weren't 15 to 17 Republicans that would vote to override.
As mentioned earlier upthread, September 11 changed everything and the number one priority of the Bush administration was the global war on terror and the defense of the country
And as I said, it wouldn't be hard to find Democrats justifying their spending as being best for the country, because priority one is helping people being hurt by the economy.
So then why not agree that fiscal discipline was the last thing he was interested in, and that to say that his administration was a fiscally responsible era is complete crap?
To put those numbers in perspective, Canada is spending the equivalent to the US spending 250 billion dollars a year. Essentially our deficit is one sixth of what Obama is spending.
Personally, I think the deficit up here is far too high.
I think Obama is insane, and in just a year, he’s managed to eradicate one of the more significant advantages in terms of government indebtedness that you folks have over Canada.
I’m from the camp which believes that government expenditures must be matched by government revenue, and if you increase spending in one area then you must either increase revenue or decrease spending in another. We’re kind of funny that way.
Sure there were. A budget had to be passed. You don't veto a budget without a replacement that is agreed to by a majority. The Dems and their compliant media fought everything he was trying to do. They trumped up non-budgetary distractions endlessly - Exhibit A: Joe Wilson.
You are blinded by your BDS, no different than Michael Moore's same illness.
That's pretty easy to refute: Republicans will lose to Mickey Mouse if they run another BobDull or Juan McPain. There is an old expression in politics: "You can't beat somebody with nobody."
Never forget, the GOP is nicknamed "The Stupid Party." Mitt Romney = four more years.
That’s assuming there is an intent to pay down the principle. We’re only paying on the interest. This is the equivalent of an interest-only mortgage on a house.
Don't confuse how they act today with how they'll act when there is a threat they'll get a conservative President. They'll fall in line in time, they always do. They have nowhere else to go.
Absolutely correct. Just because Obama is worse doesn’t mean that we should let Bush II off the hook. Bush’s deficits make you look back favorably to Clinton’s budgets, some of which were balanced or very close to it.
1. Clinton didn't do anything for that budget, it was a Contract with America: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America
2. Bush was in office during a major conflict and this conflict was used by the opposition party to do what they wanted with spending, attaching everything known to God to defense and Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental spending bills.
You're giving both men credit/discredit out of context or over which they had little control, they just happened to occupy that position when a series of events unfolded. Bush was dealt a bad hand and did very well, the best one can reasonably expect especially after 2006 when the House (Which controls spending) went Democrat.
The public has become “blame Bush” and “race card” resistant.
Problem is...depressions pave the way for demogogues...like the Obama plan on steroids.
I just don't think he can get all the demographics he got last time.
Playing on White Guilt and then slapping the faces of the voters is never a good long-term strategy.
Well stated conservative thinking. Here's a picture of the revenues during the Bush Presidency ...
“Bush matched his 2001 tax cuts with additional cuts in 2003 that ended double taxation of dividends, reduced capital gains taxes, and cut small business taxes. These tax cuts – along with spending restraint – produced 52 straight months of job creation, and more than 8 million new jobs. The Bush years witnessed the longest period of economic growth since President Reagan. From 2000 to 2008, real gross domestic product (GDP) grew by more than 18.5 percent. Labor productivity inceased an average of 1.5 percent annually, faster than in the 1970’s, ‘80’s, and ‘90’s. Real after-tax income per capita increased by more than 11 percent. The American economy grew from $9.7 trillion in 2000 to $14.2 trillion at the end of 2008, even while suffering a financial crisis late in the Bush presidency. That $4.5 trillion in growth alone is bigger than the entire Japanese economy. Such things do not happen by accident.” … Rove: Courage and Consequence, page 236
True.
Yeah, and the president is sitting in the cat-bird seat. If memory serves, Bill Clinton used vetoing budgets and the consequential government shut-downs as a pretty effective tool for getting what he wanted from Newt Gingrich.
You are blinded by your BDS, no different than Michael Moore's same illness.
And you seem to be suffering from a severe case of BBAS yourself.
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.