Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Dime's Worth Of Difference? (Liberal Republicans Say "NON!" To Tax Cuts)
OpinionJournal.com ^ | 7/11/04 | Pete Du Pont

Posted on 07/11/2004 9:26:00 PM PDT by goldstategop

An important and serious argument is going on in Washington about whether taxes on Americans' incomes should stay where they are or dramatically rise, and whether government spending should continue its accelerating growth. We know what Democrats think. They despise tax cuts and believe government spending should be higher. Washington Republicans, on the other hand, are unsure of themselves. They used to be for lower taxes and smaller government; now they seem to want bigger spending even if it means higher taxes, abandoning Reagan conservatism for '60s liberalism. In other words, this is a battle for the heart of the Republican Party; the outcome matters, and it seems to be in doubt. With the help of three liberal Republicans (Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island), and one who should know better (John McCain of Arizona), the Senate, with 51 votes, adopted a rule that if passed in the House will end all the Bush tax cuts and ensure that no new ones are enacted.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: axixofevil; dupont; gop; liberalism; rinos; taxcuts; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 301-315 next last
To: Tax Government
"This is NOT ACCEPTABLE. ....I, for my part, DEMAND that ...

Well, isn't that nice.

101 posted on 07/11/2004 10:35:10 PM PDT by bayourod (Kerry, the human downer, knows the words to "optimism" but can't quite get the tune right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
what? no Texans? =o)

sounds pretty good. although Santorum ain't conservative enough for me =o)

102 posted on 07/11/2004 10:35:12 PM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003

I hear there isn't enough gold in the world to support it. Like my own personal savings will devalue by 50-fold.


103 posted on 07/11/2004 10:35:15 PM PDT by RockinRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

You may not live to see a 75% tax rate, but your kids and grandkids certainly will.

The incredible growth in domestic spending virtually guarantees it. There is no other way out of an 8 trillion dollar deficit.

If you don't pay the price, your kids will.
We need to stop the insanity NOW...and that means holding our so-called "conservative" leaders accountable. If they won't reduce spending, they deserve a little pain at the ballot box.

If they don't EARN your vote, don't waste it on them.


104 posted on 07/11/2004 10:35:41 PM PDT by Capitalism2003 (America is too great for small dreams. - Ronald Reagan, speech to Congress. January 1, 1984.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

If this country became bankrupt and poor like Argentina, it might be enough to get people to wake up to the fact government handouts don't come from trees. They have to be exacted from every one who works. Government produces nothing, it can only take.


105 posted on 07/11/2004 10:35:56 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

You may not live to see a 75% tax rate, but your kids and grandkids certainly will.

The incredible growth in domestic spending virtually guarantees it. There is no other way out of an 8 trillion dollar deficit.

If you don't pay the price, your kids will.
We need to stop the insanity NOW...and that means holding our so-called "conservative" leaders accountable. If they won't reduce spending, they deserve a little pain at the ballot box.

If they don't EARN your vote, don't waste it on them.


106 posted on 07/11/2004 10:36:18 PM PDT by Capitalism2003 (America is too great for small dreams. - Ronald Reagan, speech to Congress. January 1, 1984.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: bayourod

Yeah. Live with it. :)


107 posted on 07/11/2004 10:36:20 PM PDT by Tax Government
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Inflation caused by the Federal reserve is a terrible thing for the country. There is probably a way to move to a real money system without causing catastrophe. We did it before, didn't we?


108 posted on 07/11/2004 10:37:10 PM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Owens-Santorum would work for me. But--could they WIN? The best candidate in the universe means nothing if they can't convince the mushy moderate fence-sitters to vote for them.


109 posted on 07/11/2004 10:37:50 PM PDT by RockinRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

You may not live to see a 75% tax rate, but your kids and grandkids certainly will.

The incredible growth in domestic spending virtually guarantees it. There is no other way out of an 8 trillion dollar deficit.

If you don't pay the price, your kids will.
We need to stop the insanity NOW...and that means holding our so-called "conservative" leaders accountable. If they won't reduce spending, they deserve a little pain at the ballot box.

If they don't EARN your vote, don't waste it on them.

No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible


110 posted on 07/11/2004 10:38:08 PM PDT by Capitalism2003 (America is too great for small dreams. - Ronald Reagan, speech to Congress. January 1, 1984.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Well, Phil Graham ain't that old. ;^)

Santorum did support Scotty Spector. Aside from that brain fart, Santorum is a very principled conservative and pragmatic politician.

111 posted on 07/11/2004 10:39:01 PM PDT by Reagan Man (.....................................................The Choice is Clear....... Re-elect BUSH-CHENEY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I guess if the "value" was set to gold in a way that reflects current wealth, it could "freeze" things essentially. We wouldn't personally all lose our a$$es but the future would work out correctly. I dunno much about that, I was a marketing major...hehe.


112 posted on 07/11/2004 10:39:18 PM PDT by RockinRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: KDD

When 2/26/93 happened we survived quite well. This war of attrition by Muslims against Jews and Christians was happening long before Bush was Pres. We've had numerous acts of terror perpetrated against this country over the last half a century. It took a Bush and Ashcroft to exploit those lunatics actions into a curtailment of all our freedoms. Why do you think Clinton didn't try to push a Constitution shredding Patriot Act on the American People after the WTC was bombed in 93. You can be sure he had it on his desk.


Clinton was to busy doing unimportant things. Anything he considered important was just for him.... She was probably on his desk as well.


113 posted on 07/11/2004 10:40:57 PM PDT by Lovergirl (Bush/Cheney / 4 more years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003
Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

114 posted on 07/11/2004 10:41:13 PM PDT by Reagan Man (.....................................................The Choice is Clear....... Re-elect BUSH-CHENEY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Capitalism2003

It is encouraging to read this thread and see some common sense consdervatives still exist. I was really beginning to lose hope. Far too many Republicans are distracted by the fireworks in Iraq and ignore the fact that Bush is growing the bureacracy more than Clinton could have ever dreamed.

I wonder how many people will happily pull the "R" lever when the federal budget (at current growth levels) hits $3 TRILLION ($3,000,000,000,000.00) in 2006?


115 posted on 07/11/2004 10:41:50 PM PDT by Capitalism2003 (America is too great for small dreams. - Ronald Reagan, speech to Congress. January 1, 1984.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Thats Gramm, btw =o)


116 posted on 07/11/2004 10:44:02 PM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

The price og gold would skyrocket, for a long time.


117 posted on 07/11/2004 10:44:54 PM PDT by GeronL (wketchup.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Well, excussssssssssssse me! =^(

Oops. Phil Gramm.

118 posted on 07/11/2004 10:46:42 PM PDT by Reagan Man (.....................................................The Choice is Clear....... Re-elect BUSH-CHENEY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
GWB's lack of fiscal leadership is the cause of all this. And his muddled understanding of fiscal responsiblity springs directly from his unfortunate belief in something called "compassionate conservatism." "Compassionate conservatism" is a misnomer that could only have been coined by someone unfamiliar with conservative principles, which have never lacked in compassion but which have always insisted that compassion in its rightful form counsels personal responsiblity. Conservatives understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

When the president can say, as he has, that "if someone is hurting it's the government's job to be there," he is actually saying there is a free lunch, that government has inexhaustible resources from which to draw, and that government's beneficence should be showered on the "hurting." This is the nonsense talk of someone who has never thought seriously about economics, someone who doesn't understand why Hayek and Friedman were right and Keynes and Marx were wrong.

GWB hasn't thought seriously about too many things I'm afraid. He's entirely too shaky in too many areas and it's really beginning to bug me.

119 posted on 07/11/2004 10:48:17 PM PDT by beckett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

We could go to a gold standard immediately if we choose. Simply peg the dollar to the price of gold. The old exhange rate was around 35-1 I believe. Now, they simply need to calculate the number of dollars in circulation, divide it buy our current gold inventory, and lock the value at a certain number of dollars per ounce.

The value will be stable. Every dollar you earn today will buy the same amount of goods 20 years from now as it buys today.

No more stealth taxation (inflation).
It will encourage good habits (saving and investing).

Most importantly, government will be FORCED to cut spending across the board and will have no choice but to make tradeoffs (increased defense = fewer entitlements)...rather then printing more little green rectangles to pay for everything and making what you have saved worth less.


120 posted on 07/11/2004 10:48:53 PM PDT by Capitalism2003 (America is too great for small dreams. - Ronald Reagan, speech to Congress. January 1, 1984.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 301-315 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson