I dunno, maybe he should stick to writing about his glamorous life and travels.
You can't call him a conservative when it's plain he never accepted the fundamental tenets of conservatism.
Bolshevik Ben strikes again.
Thanks Obama!
If Clinton’s “sound economic footing “ was based on the internet bubble, how sound was it? Bush’s taxcuts sure did a better job of propelling economic recovery than Obama’s government spending stimulus.
But even his glamorous travels and life are filled with complaints, arguments, fights with people on airplanes followed by continually being “sick.” How someone who is always so sick can even walk into his backyard much less travel as much as he does and comment on our “dire” situation is beyond me.
Ben has gone the way of Arianna Huffington.
I’ll bet that Ben’s wife or kid is a raving liftist.....he has changed .
He lost the plot several years ago. About the same time as National Review and to a lesser extent American Spectator.
Hey Ben,
During the Clinton ‘surplus’ years, Congress was controlled by REPUBLICANS.
oh.. forgot about that, huh?
The disease reportedly affects about 30% of the population, and symptoms range from catatonic stupers to frothing nonsense.
NO known cure to date.
Among his many sins, he was a speech writer for Richard Nixon and a "poverty lawyer."
Years ago when I subscribed to The American Spectator I would usually avoid reading his column. His hypochondria, cries of poverty, slobbering encomiums to his batty Hollywood friends and painful accounts of his son's bratty behavior got to be too annoying to bother with.
“Ben Stein Slams Tax Cuts, Tea Partiers, Bush, and Obama as ‘Careless,’ But Praises Clinton”
There is more than a slight wheel wobble to THAT logic.
Ben is among the guilty rich, who spent most of his life giving away his money. And he believe everybody else should too.
What Ben fails to recognize is that it is NOT the governments job to spread my income around and they do a lousy job of it.
The government only wants MY MONEY to buy votes with.
Being effective in the management of government programs is not important.
In defense of Supply Siders (I'm not one), nowhere do they suggest that tax cuts always yield large revenues. The Laffer Curve merely points out that there is some tax rate -- which can vary with circumstances -- that will maximize revenue.
Now, as we all know, Bush should have whipped the GOP Congress to cut spending by roughly the amount of his tax cuts. But, Bush is not a Supply Sider; he and Pappy are dyed-in-the-wool Keynesians.
Remember when H.W. referred to Supply Side economics as "voodoo"?
How many people does Ben employ?
Stein must have had a stroke and has not been himself on taxes.
Hey Ben... does “Contract with America” strike a bell?
I think people are being a bit hard on Ben here. I think he wants less spending, but his point is, as long as we are spending what we are, we can’t cut taxes.
I would be all for cutting spending first, then taxes, if I knew the government was capable of doing it, which they are not.
Although pro-free market, economist Herb Stein had a strong anti-doctrinaire and pragmatic streak that led to him being described as “a liberal’s conservative and a conservative’s liberal.” Ben Stein seems to have taken up a similar niche.
$400 per child is just a Dem-type spending program to get people to vote for you. Bush's economic policy was perfectly miserable; I can't stand when people defend it just because he was an R.
If you look at the Paul Ryan plan, he understands supply side. Not that it could pass. Also, they sold it as a deficit reduction plan, not a jobs plan, and that was a mistake as well (because it adds too much debt).