George Bush's Big Government Adventure

Free Republic and Various ^ | 01-30-02 | aaabest

[AAABEST]

With Conservative Like This, Who Needs Liberals?

Let me start off by addressing those who have been bashing(and I do mean bash) me and other well intentioned and well known Freepers as being anti-Bush, Libertarians, from the reform party or whatever. 

I voted for GWB, and I can ping several freepers to this thread that met me in real life at several Bush rallies (with megaphone in hand). I was a member of the Broward County Young Republicans before moving to the West coast of Florida and I was active in Jeb Bush's campaign for Governor. 

I've been on this forum for almost 4 years and anyone that knows me is aware of my conservative views and knows that I'm not a member of the reform party, I'm not a Libertarian (large "l") or any of the other things I and others like me have been accused of.

If you have been engaging in inflammatory rhetoric, bashing long-time, well known Freepers or acting like children because not all of us are enthralled with "Georges Big Government Adventure",  please try to control yourselves, at least while posting on this thread. 

It's not my purpose (at least at this point) to get GWB un-elected, I like him, he has a beautiful wife, he's a good Commander in Chief and he seems like an honest politician. However,  if he keeps ignoring conservative principles and promoting a larger more intrusive government, I and others can no longer continue to support him....on principle. 

We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.

Above is the Free Republic mission statement.  After his first year, would anyone say that GWB has worked towards this end? I think many conservatives suffer from some kind of Stockholm Syndrome as a result of 8 years of President Clinton, because when I ask many of them what GWB has done for conservatism lately, all I get is that he's not Clinton. 

I know he's not a corrupt, law breaking scoundrel, but is that all that's required? Can our republic survive a cycle where Republicans get into office grow government greatly, interspersed with Democrats who grow government even more greatly with little or no reduction? There are actually people on FR that think all of this growth in government spending is some grandiose 8 year plan by Mr. Bush to fool Democrats so that he can cut government later. What an absurd notion.

If any of the initiatives below originated from the Clinton administration, people on FR would have had a cow. Those "Day in the Life of President Bush" threads garner hundreds of fawning responses, while a thread on how our government is growing out of control will die after 10.

I appeal to anyone reading this to consider the below information without bias. The links will open in a separate window for you convenience.  I will be adding to this information as necessary God bless America, God bless this forum and God bless you.

Click on the Picture of the President (thinking of new ways grow government) for the corresponding article.

	Huge education spending bill (i.e. Federal Local School Board Bribery Act) which liberal Democrats love that doesn't mention a word about choice or local control.
	Food stamps for immigrants.
	Largest spending bill in American History. The first to exceed 2 trillion dollars.
	The Airport Security Bill that completely takes control of over 28,000 screening jobs. Now it seems that they don't even have to be high school graduates either. The big difference, they can't be fired.
	100 million for welfare moms.
	Hugely Expanding Clinton's Amercorps boondoggle that all conservatives railed against.
	Kowtowing to law breaking illegal immigrants by proposing amnesty. Speaking of illegal immigrants who sneak across the border; "And we've got to respect that, seems like to me, and treat those people with respect," he added. "I remind people all across our country: Family values do not stop at the border."
.	38 Billion for a new Homeland Security bureaucracy that allots a 20% increase for border control. Guess what. It goes to our problematic Canadian border, with not a dollar spent on the Mexican border. Read it for yourself
	The  Orwellian "Patriot Act" that gives Federal authorities carte blanche to rifle through all of your digital communications and essentially,  rob your house without notice.
	71.5 billion over 10 years for government health care.
	Not releasing appropriate documents on Clinton and FBI corruption.

 

[Joe Hadenuf]

Just vote for the best party that actually has a chance in hell of winning.

I hate to rock your world, but I can no longer do that. I have done that in the past, (voted for the better of two evils) and I don't plan on doing it again. That's part of the problem. And thats why we have leaders that no longer represent the best interest of the American people. Its needs to stop. And if it takes getting worse before the American people wake up, so be it. Unfortunately, I believe that's exactly what its going to take.

[VinnyTex]

The Cato institute liked it.

January 29, 2002

Bush Speech To Congress Maintains Number of Initiatives
President proposes nearly equal number of initiatives as last year, Cato analysis finds

WASHINGTON?In his first State of the Union address, President Bush proposed one more policy initiative than he did last year, according to a Cato Institute analysis of the speech.

Tonight, the president outlined 39 new or expanded initiatives, up from 38 initiatives he proposed in last year's address to a joint session of Congress, and significantly fewer than the 104 initiatives proposed by President Clinton in his 2000 State of the Union address. Bush made his 39 proposals in 48 minutes?one minute less than last year. This is the fourth year the Cato Institute has tabulated the number of new initiatives proposed in State of the Union addresses. Cato Executive Vice President David Boaz offers the following additional analysis:

"It's a pleasure to watch a State of the Union Address largely devoted to carrying out the federal government's proper function of providing national defense. Too many recent State of the Union speeches have involved a laundry list of proposals that exceed the powers granted to the federal government in the Constitution.

"President Bush issued a clear and strong promise to pursue the war on terrorists as long as necessary. His effective management of that war deserves our thanks. However, he did not make a convincing case for 'the largest increase in defense spending in two decades.' The war on terrorists does not require hundreds of thousands of additional troops or new Cold War weapons; it requires improved intelligence, high-tech weapons, and better homeland security, and it remains to be seen whether the president's $48 billion Pentagon spending increase will be spent on such necessary purposes.

"Two-thirds of the president's speech was devoted to the fundamental federal responsibility for national security. However, even there, there was a failure to distinguish between federal responsibilities such as border protection and military operations, and state and local responsibilities such as police and fire departments. There is no good reason for the federal government to tax Americans and then return the money to state and local governments for local police forces. That money should stay in local communities in the first place.

"Americans concerned about their future retirement should be delighted that President Bush reiterated his commitment to establishing personal retirement accounts for younger workers who choose them. And it is too bad that Congressman Gephardt continues to scare Americans with words like 'gambling in the stock market.' Congressman Gephardt knows that about half of all Americans have participated in the past two decades of stock market appreciation, and he should allow working-class Americans to invest as well.

"Finally, it was gratifying to hear the president say, 'America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity: the rule of law... limits on the power of the state... respect for women... private property... free speech... equal justice... and religious tolerance.' Those are the liberal values on which America was founded, but it's been some time since a president included 'limits on the power of the state' and 'private property' among our fundamental values, along with 'respect for women ... free speech ... and religious tolerance.' This president and his team seem to understand that all those principles go together, and we can only hope that he will continue to focus his energy on the federal government's unique and important responsibilities, and leave other matters to the states, the local communities, and the people."

Because the president may announce new initiatives in major policy speeches in the days to come, today's numbers may be revised.

---

A Summary of the Policy Initiatives Made by President Bush in the State of the Union Address

January 29, 2002

President	Year	Proposals	Minutes
Clinton	1999	95	77
Clinton	2000	104	89
Bush	2001	38	49
Bush	2002	39	48

Here is a list of new or expanded initiatives proposed by President Bush earlier tonight:

Increase Defense Spending
1. "We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack."
2. "We need to replace aging aircraft..."
3. "...[military personnel] also deserve another pay raise."

Homeland Security
4. "We will develop vaccines to fight anthrax and other deadly diseases..."
5. "We will increase funding to help states and communities to train..."
6. "We will improve intelligence collection and sharing..."
7. "...expand patrols at borders..."
8. "...strengthen the security of air travel..."
9. "....use technology to track the arrivals and departures of visitors to the United States."

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
10. "I support extending unemployment benefits..."
11. "...and direct assistance for health care coverage."

Education
12. "We need to prepare our children to read and succeed in school with improved Head Start..."
13. "...and early childhood development programs."
14. "We must upgrade our teacher colleges..."
15. "...and teacher training..."
16. "...and launch a major recruiting drive..."

Energy
17. "This Congress must act to encourage conservation..."
18. "...promote technology..."
19. "...build infrastructure..."
20. "...and it must act to increase energy production at home..."

Trade
21. "...so I ask Congress to finally approve Trade Promotion Authority."

Fighting the Recession
22. "...the way to create jobs, is to grow the economy by encouraging investment in factories..."
23. "...and by speeding up tax relief."
24. "For the sake of American workers, let's pass a stimulus package."

Health Care
25. "I ask Congress to join me this year to enact a Patient's Bill of Rights..."
26. "...to give uninsured workers credits to help buy health coverage..."
27. "...to approve an historic increase in spending for veterans' health."
28. "...to give seniors a sound and modern Medicare system that includes coverage for prescription drugs."

Pension Reforms
29. "I ask Congress to enact new safeguards for 401(k) and pension plans
30. "Through stricter accounting standards..."
31. "...and tougher disclosure requirements..."
32. "We must make Social Security financially stable..."
33. "...and allow personal retirements accounts for younger workers who choose them."

Misc.
34. "Members, you and I will work together in the months ahead on other issues: productive farm policy..."
35. "...a cleaner environment..."
36. "...broader home ownership..."
37. "...and ways to encourage the good work of charities and faith-based groups."

Freedom Corps
38. "I invite you to join the new USA Freedom Corps."

Peace Corps
39. "So we will renew the promise of the Peace Corps, double its volunteers over the next five years..."

[verboten]

Do you honestly think any State, or our Nation for that matter is so small that a tiny little militia could really protect ALL of us?

Whose house will a robber steal from, mine where I own defensive firearms, or my neighbor who plans to call the police for defense? Police stations and military bases are very safe, but they dont do much for my immediate needs. Witness the events of 9-11. Had citizens been able to protect themselves then things may have turned out differently.

Every single person in Gov. has told us it will take some time to FIX the problem.

The problem is government. Government fixes nothing. It can render justice by protecting property, or render injustice by plundering property and redistributing it. Our government is mostly involved in the latter.

You need to stop thinking "city" and think "Nation".

Respectfully, I think that is empire think, not republic think. The US was designed as a republic of republics. Most matters should be local. Folks in Mass. should not be dictating my life in NC. Also, I have a greater chance of knowing, and having a say with local politicians. The guys in DC represent the narrow interests of the elite. It doesn't matter what letter they attach to their name. When Bush tells me I need to give money to help people 2000 miles away I cant know how true his words are. But I can see the problems I live with day to day. All this money going to help other people never seems to solve anything other then take money from me I would have used locally to fix the problems I know of. The only problem I know with certainty gets solved is how to pay all the people getting a government salary.

[A.J.Armitage]

Actually, he has cut back Government in certain respects. See "Southack"'s post for a list of instances.

Trivial compared to the ones in the article at the top.

[willa]

Thanx for the post. Sometimes I wonder if anybody is paying attention to what is going on. Glad I'm not alone.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

Ignorance abounds! They are citizens .. weekend warriors, thus citizen soldiers!! They work as teachers, Doctors, mechanics by week..and then work as Gaurdsmen one weekend a month. There are full time Gaurdsmen, but they are also State Militia. Of course the AG's for the Gaurds report to Washington.. do you really want rogue States? Don't you see where that could create chaos? Come on.. it has worked pretty dang well for a long time. The National Guards are there through natural disaster (State protection) and now are being called above and beyond their mission duty by serving on Foreign soil.

They ARE State Militia.

[TEXICAN II]

The Marlboro Man with a plan-its a New World Order.

[sam_paine]

Am I too late to chime? Mr. Boortz was just grumping over the same thing: Bush is just a big spender and a hawk, not really a conservative champion.

Sounds like Buchanan....and a bunch of guys I knew in high school that went right for the jugular and never got laid!!

Perhaps in the current climate of feel good democracy, ruled by a majority who pays a minority of the taxes....perhaps running in and slaying the dragon today by killing the DOE and IRS, etc. in one swell foop ain't the best strategery to choose???

Let's say he courts the electorate (spending lotsa cash), which gets him re-elected in a landslide in 2004 with a Republican congress (wearing his ring)??? Having that obvious mandate (on the couch saying 'oh yes') and no obstacle in congress (parents not home), he could really knock heels with the conservative dream.

Can he do that now? Not while everybody's watching, no.

Same thing with the Federal Airline Security debacle. Can he fight it head on rhetorically? NO. Will Federal Employees solve the problem?? NO. So he let's congress have their way, and just today some idiot in San Fran gets through with a bomb-test-positive sneaker.. Hello?! So he can now say, "Well, look folks, we tried the Feds, but now we've got to kick tail. We're gonna do it my way now."

Maybe he won't come through, but I'd rather not see him do anything rash in Congress on the IRS or DOE that gets Hillary taking over the War on Terror in 2004.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

Broken glass Republican checking in here.

I, too, did not like a few things in the speech last night - especially the headstart, healthcare for unemployed, and the free prescription drugs for seniors.

But, every day, I think about what if Gore were in power now. It would not just be Gore. It would be the Clintonoids, too. I agree with Jim Robinson in that I don't think our country would have survived a Gore Presidency.

I cannot possibly for one second say or do anything that will align myself with the Stalinists in this country. Therefore, I will salute a disciplined, honorable, "loving kind of guy" who has shown true grit in the face of the attacks on our nation by the enemies of freedom and in the face of the Dasshole/Clinton organized crime mafia gang.

And, I will never forget, this President's leadership during this time of crisis. I will never forget his restoration of honor and dignity to OUR White House. I will never stop admiring his genuine love for people, including his wife and family, and of his love for little children.

No, he is not accomplishing a massive rolling back of the years of liberal largesse. He is wrong on some important issues (mainly the size, scope, and role of government).

I understand the objections posted here. They will be considered in the next election. But, for now, I would rather withdraw from life itself than give one second of pleasure or joy or cooperation to the Hillary Clinton led Stalinists and her apparatchniks.

Having said that - President Bush and his team should be paying attention to the objections voiced here and should understand that while he has reached out to the liberals in this country - he must reach out to those who are grateful to him for his leadership during this time of our crisis - but who treasure the Constitutional definition of government and the rights of its citizens.

I know that many conservatives will desert him in 2004 if these trends are not reversed.

[rob777]

"The actual fact is that nothing matters up to a point as long as he lowers taxes lower taxes lead to more revenue and health care is already screwed up."



Here we have an excellent example of how conservative thinking has degenerated. Genuine conservatives have NO interest in seeing the federal government collect more revenue. Looking at tax cuts as a way to pump up the economy in order to bring in more tax revenue is akin to slave owners treating their slaves well so as to get more work out of them. There was a time when conservatives opposed unconstitutional spending and the income tax as a matter of principle. Too many conservatives today are OK with income taxes and unconstitutional government spending as long as it does not go too far. In principle they do not differ from liberals, the differnce is only one of degree. This reminds of the story of someone offering another person on a street corner $1,000,000 to have sex. The person accepts and then was asked if the offer would be acceptable at $1. The response was "Of course not, what kind of person do you think I am?" The reply was "I think that we have already determined that, all we are arguing over now is the price".

[Ragin1]

"These are the people who will never be satisfied and find it much easier to criticize, since constanly criticizing is the easy part"

That's right Dane, I'll never be satisfied. I sat through 4 yrs of a liar, and then had to set through another 8 yrs of his counterpart. The only things I like that Bush has done is, told the UN to stick it on their anti gun gathering, and signed on to the tax cut.

You can harp on the senate all you want, but when push comes to shove, our conservative seems to sign the yes column for the Democrats far too often. There is a power of the veto, no?

Oh and critiscism on Free Republic isn't half as easy as it used to be. If billy would have done half the crap in the original post's links, there would have been a world of $hit right here.

[incindiary]

I mean.. whose the enemy here?

Well, I thought it was any politician who constantly disregards the constitution, turns a blind eye to corruption, grows the government and takes us down the socialist/globalist path. But apparently, the only enemy some of you recognize are the ones with a (D) by their name.

If it was as simple as (D)- bad, (R)- good, then things would be so much easier.

[shuckmaster]

39 ways to tax people who work for a living...

[St.Chuck]

Considering that you didn't read the comments...

I've read the comments and most are sympathetic to the original article. Which is refreshing. Most articles critical of Bush are met with intense hostility. This thread, with a few exceptions, contains a lot of agreement with the sentiments of the original article.

[RamsNo1]

How would you like to have been on the 110th floor of the WTC on September 11th?

[TLBSHOW]

This is pure Bush Bashing that is what I see.

[TLBSHOW]

This is pure Bush Bashing that is what I see.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

Whose house will a robber steal from, mine where I own defensive firearms, or my neighbor who plans to call the police for defense?

You couldn't POSSIBLY have read my reply.

So your one of those who think anyone who works for the Government is the big bad wolf?? Give me a break!!!!

I love your kind of attitude. When I see it.. I keep thinking.. "yeah.. your the kind of person I want protecting me.. NOT!!!"

This country is doing pretty darn good. I will take it any day over any radical "I hate our Government" type.

I've known, loved and worked with Federal Employee's. And I can say they love this country, and are honorable. They aren't however pshyco.. thank God!! I can just see some of the "alleged" militia types running this country.. NO THANKS!!!

[Ben Ficklin]

I have a message for all the Bush bashers on this thread. All 59 of you. Seriously, I've counted every one of you thru reply #200. 59 malcontents! Thats all. So if the thread goes to 400 there will be 118 malcontents. BFD!

Most of you didn't vote for Bush in 2000. But if you did, please vote for another in 2004. He doesn't need you vote.

You people are fringe fanatics.