CATO Institute lambastes President Bush

CATO Institute ^ | July 31, 2003 | Veronique de Rugy and Tad DeHaven

[iconoclast]

I did a search, but didn't find it posted.

OK by me if you post it every day.

[iconoclast]

We're a year and a half away from election night, can you put up a candidate that will win?

Putting the nails in the coffin of the neo-con philosophy is more important than winning.

[Gore_ War_ Vet]

Cool deal. Now, are you ready to answer the question of how crashing airliners induce prescription drug entitlements, bloated farm subsidies, massive federal education funding, and so on?

Just had to be said again!

[habs4ever]

Your point, ace?

[habs4ever]

The "neo-con" philosophy is mainstream Republicanism, so if you wish it to go away, then you wish the party to implode.

[habs4ever]

Cutting gov't to pre-Coolidge like levels isn't on the national radar, so promoting a candidate with rollback in mind isn't going to get you far, except a few pats on the back from DC based think tanks and their supporters.These same folk were so hot to have Newt rollback the juggernaut in 1995 that he and the Pubbies had their heads handed to them in a classic cases of overreach and hubris.If Owens has the right temperment and can appeal to the middle, he could be POTUS material.How long did it take to find the guy who could match Reagan's popularity and come with his same brand of common sense, toughness and decency? A long time...and Bush has the right stuff to do what the job requires, and that is LEAD.

If by 2008, a guy like Owens had that same stuff, and his issues resonate across the land, then he could be the guy.People have to see in him the leadership qualities that can make him an effective POTUS.Time will tell.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Yep, sounds like a global socialist."

I'm no socialist, you however, need to wake up to the realities of today's world.

I don't know if you were too busy counting your money and missed it, but the targets of the attacks attacks on 9/11 were far from being symbolic, or random sites. The attacks brought our economy to its knees, they were designed to do so.

They crippled our airline industry, our financial industry, our hospitality industry. They forced us to spend billions of unbudgeted dollars in an attempt to achieve the impossible...secure a free nation from terrorist attacks.

Meanwhile, the people who perpetrated these attacks are seen as national heroes in underdeveloped counties because they spend money building schools and hospitals for the poor.

It's a money war, and the ChiCom are entering that war soon, if they haven't already, at a different level.

Go ahead and spend your energies trying to get a conservative dog catcher elected in your home town, the rest of us will do the heavy lifting for the nation.

[AAABEST]

Your point, ace?

My point is keep your stupid liberal Canadian opinions to yourself. We have enough liberal Republicans in our own country without having to import them from that pathetic trash dump you live in.

[AmericanVictory]

We're not talking abut cutting back to Coolidge levels, but about attuning to and staying within the confines of the growth of the private sector.

[habs4ever]

I just knew that was going to be your point.Funny thing, Ace, is that my business capital is invested in the US, so I will continue to to watch and comment upon politics and if it pisses you off, well, goody!Sooner or later, the jingoism of the fringers rises like scum on a pond.

Have fun at bingo!

[habs4ever]

Then the composition of the House and Senate and what is feasible to enact are paramount, aren't they? Do you really think Bush's inclinations are to be as big a spender as Carter ?

[Dolphy]

But devaluing the Presidency of Ronald Reagan should not be the goal of conservatives and Republican's...

Fair enough, it wasn't my intention to devalue Reagan. I just don't think his record can be used to devalue Bush either.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I have made my choice of candidate.

What's yours?

[AAABEST]

Have fun at bingo!

You can add being ignorant about my age group to your long list of of things you're ignorant about. I guess you like being laughed at as many on FR know me personally, unlike a mystery meat Canadian who constantly claims to be some financial hotshot. You're probably some scrub living off Canadian taxpayers.

Any other statements you want to make to show everyone you have no idea WTF you're talking about?

In fact you were the simpleton arguing a while back that deficits don't matter, while you claim to be some kind of financial guru. A guru who can't seem figure out the downside of spending over a quarter trillion per year on interest payments.

[BlackbirdSST]

I have made my choice of candidate. What's yours?

I haven't! Blackbird.

[iconoclast]

The best thing that WILL happen to the CONSERVATIVE movement is going to be when Bush loses in '04.

And the most effective way to get the message across is to get out and vote for the Constitutionalist or Libertarian candidate, not just set home on our duffs.

[jammer]

Original metaphors? I was pointing out how ridiculous yours were. They weren't intended to be original.

[e_engineer]

Eighteen posts of bitchin', following an entire article of bitchin'. Not one solution (other than electing a Democrat for president), and not one viable candidate thus far to be seen.

The idea here is that if we bitch loud enough maybe GWB will wake up and realize that our votes are not locked in. If our bitching causes him to change course, then I'll be able to vote for him. Someone in the White House has made a bad assumption that conservatives will vote for GWB because he is the lesser of two evils. I won't.

GWB knows that every time he panders to the left he will lose a small number of votes on the right. He thinks the number is very small, and if we keep quiet he'll never know the truth.

I want GWB to know that I always vote, and if I don't vote for him, I WILL vote for the opposition. In this way conservatives can "cancel" the votes of the few liberals GWB may win with his pandering.

If anyone in the White House is reading this, maybe you should re-calculate your numbers with this in mind.

[Reagan Man]

I just don't think his record can be used to devalue Bush either.

You're starting to piss me off. I've not devalued PresBush at any time. You made some outrageous charges against PresReagan's legacy that weren't true. So don't take a swipe at me because you screwed up with the facts.

[Stew Padasso]

The bottom line: your belief set is offensive and digs into my wallet. It won't be long and you (actually you won't because you'll hide behind the government) will have to come get the money.