CATO INSTITUTE: CLINTON MORE FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE THAN BUSH

The Cato Institute ^ | August 8th, 2002 | Veronique de Rugy

[Howie]

Dear Cato Institute, who the hell do I vote for now?

[plain talk]

They raise good points. Unfortunately they left out a huge part of the equation - the gutless wonders in Congress.

[Marie Antoinette]

Good point. Bush didn't write any of these spending bills, did he?

Mr.M

[SEGUET]

Forget all those legislative and operational indiscretions. We need to remember that he's honest,has integrity, has an MBA and has brought civility back to the WH - that's all that's important for leader of the Party. After all he's got a 70+% approval rating - Why not? the Dems even approve of all these left leaning programs he's implemented.

[widowithfoursons]

Hello??? Only Congress can spend $. Clinton was restrained by the Republican House.

[Howie]

Do you think Reagan would have signed all that stuff into law?

[flyervet]

So why haven't they restrained Bush?

I admit, I find this distressing. When I read the headline I thought, "Yeah, but we're in a war right now and that means more spending,". It looks like the Cato Institute controlled for that, though. Crud.

[WyldKard]

It's all very sad, because it's true. In many ways, Bush the Second has been a tremendous disappointment to the Conservative cause. Sometimes I honestly wonder if he's any better than Gore would have been, at least economically speaking.

[Deuce]

Reps PRETEND to be for limited government. Dems PRETEND to be for the common man. But, is anybody really surprised that both Reps and Dems favor BIG government of, by, and for their BIG contributors? Since they always get away with it, don't expect 'em to change.

[Area51]

Good point. Bush didn't write any of these spending bills, did he?

Mr.M

4 posted on 8/15/02 6:45 AM Pacific by Marie Antoinette

Actually he did. Remember his little confab with Teddy? Oh yeah, That Education budget came right out of the White House.

I beli eve the Administration also played a large part in crafting the Farm Bill also.

Nah, this spending spree is GW's. Pure and Simple.

[lavaroise]

CATO is comparing apples and oranges. Was there a 911 during Clinton years? Did Clinton inherit a mess after BUsh? I don't think SO!

[Guillermo]

Oh God.

Are you saying Bush didn't WANT all this enormous spending, that he was FORCED to take it? (Ever hear of a veto?)

Bush is a borrow and spend Republican.

The article is right. Clinton ACTED more fiscally conservative than Bush is.

[RJCogburn]

Bush didn't write any of these spending bills, did he?

Can he spell V - E - T - O ?

[Guillermo]

Yeah, we needed that disgusting farm and education bill (along with all that other social spending) as a result of 9-11.

Gimme a break.

[jammer]

For conservatives, a good case can be made that Gore would have been better, similar to 1993-1994 when people got so P.O.ed at Klinton that they elected a Pubbie (read: conservative at that time) Congress. But the lemmings at FR won't hold Bush's feet to the fire as they would have Gore, especially with respect to the Ashcroft's attempts to burn the BoR.

[skeeter]

The Cato Inst may have a point here, I don't know. But they are so out to lunch on immigration issues that, for me anyway, they've lost all credibility.

[hflynn]

When the numbers are added up, in fact, it looks like President Bush is less conservative than President Clinton.

In fact, looks can be deceiving. I notice no mention of the largest tax increase in history implemented by Clinton almost immediately after being elected which in and of itself makes George Bush fiscally more conservative than Clinton for all time. I notice no mention of the selective application of tariffs on steel and lumber which in effect makes exemption easier to get than a divorce in the Dominican Republic. The Cato institutes conclusion is absolute BS.

[RJCogburn]

Posting in large font, alas, doesn't make it so. Some actions occurred prior to 9/11, for example. Others are irrelevent to 9/11.

I don't think the using the horror of 9/11 to excuse everything Bush does, or doesn't do, is a good idea.

[RJCogburn]

The Cato Inst may have a point here, I don't know. But they are so out to lunch on immigration issues that, for me anyway, they've lost all credibility.

I believe we do better to address the arguments rather than their source.