scratch-mark

Fraudpublicans

Shocking news out of the NYT:

…President Bush unveiled a $2.57 trillion budget for 2006, the largest in the nation’s history. The cuts he called for, in areas like veterans’ medical care, farm subsidies and vocational training, were met in Washington with doubts that they would ever get through the Republican Congress.

The Cato Institute, a libertarian research institution, says overall federal spending has increased twice as fast under Mr. Bush as under Mr. Clinton. At the same time, the federal deficit is projected to hit a record high of $427 billion this year.

"The era of big government being over is over," declared Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow at the Democratic Leadership Council, a centrist Democratic research organization. That would certainly seem to be borne out in the record of the Republican revolutionaries, known as the "Class of 1994" for the year they were elected. Of the 30 who are still in the House of Representatives, 28 sponsored bills in the last Congress that would have increased government spending overall, according to the National Taxpayers Union, an antitax group.

"Too many people started to believe that the surest path to re-election is to spend money rather than cut government," says Representative Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican. "The material that comes from the Republican caucus is not to call for the elimination of this program or that, it’s to brag that we have increased the budget for education by 144 percent."

That is not surprising, says Mr. Wittmann of the Democratic Leadership Council. "Yesterday’s revolutionaries are today’s pragmatic politicians," he said. "It’s a classic tale of any revolution. They start out as revolutionaries wanting to storm the Bastille and the end up as ‘All the King’s Men.’"

Mr. Flake, the Arizona Congressman, said the future of his party hinges on the revolution’s revival. "If voters want bigger government," he warned, "then sooner or later they’ll return to the genuine article, and that’s the Democrats."

It looks to me like the voters who "want bigger government" (virtually all voters do, by the way, which is why they vote) are doing just fine and dandy by the Republicans. Both parties have always been about bigger government—always—in spite of all fraudulent rhetoric to the contrary.

All Republicans who vote Republican are fully complicit in perpetuating a fraud.

(Mike Tennant)

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

9 Comments

  1. Eye Doc on February 16, 2005 at 17:26

    Everyone wants the government to spend money on them, as long as it doesn't cost them anything. As long as somebody else has to pay for it, it's just fine. Just look at the latest poll that showed people thought jacking payroll taxes way up was a good idea, as long as it wasn't them that had to pay those increased taxes.

    There's no question that Bush has been spending too much money.That's why I sort of snicker when people act like Bush is very conservative, because he clearly is not.
    But it's ridiculous for the Democrats to pretend to be fiscally responsible. If left to them, domestic spending would be much higher.

  2. John Rogers on February 16, 2005 at 17:30

    Like anyhting in nature, it will reach a point where if it can't go on any longer, it won't. At that point, it will become fashionable (i.e. neccessary) to trim the fat.

    I'd put that date at about 2015.

    My sons will be adloscents. Joy.

  3. OTTMAN on February 17, 2005 at 01:38

    "The Cato Institute, a libertarian research institution, says overall federal spending has increased twice as fast under Mr. Bush as under Mr. Clinton. At the same time, the federal deficit is projected to hit a record high of $427 billion this year."

    Hmm, Let's see a few facts, shall we?

    1. Clinton left the country in recession after raising taxes 3 times before the corporate corruption bubble popped in 2000.

    2. Clinton let Osama bin Laden plan his terror for 9/11 during his 8 years in office after the first WTC attack in 1993 on his watch. Clinton never went to visit the site or contact family members who lost loved ones.

    3. Clinton didn't have 2 big wars going on, but did attack Iraq citing the same information democrats now say Bush lied about given to him by his CIA appointee George Tenent who Bush fired!

  4. Richard Nikoley on February 16, 2005 at 17:43

    "If left to them, domestic spending would be much higher."

    I'd say a _little_ higher.

    "Joy"

    Well, it's hard for me to be joyful about something 10 years into the future.

  5. Richard Nikoley on February 17, 2005 at 08:45

    "Hmm, Let's see a few facts, shall we?"

    So, what's the point, that Clinton is worse overall than Bush? Perhaps he was, but the fact remains that fiscally, Bush is far more of a disaster than Clinton ever dreamed of being.

    Though I didn't vote, I supported Bush for the win simply because of his mostly uncompromising stand on prosecuting the war against Radical Islam.

    Nevertheless, I hold no illusions that in domestic policy, Bush is any different than any other politician, which basically amounts to being a fraud and a thief.

  6. spenwah on February 18, 2005 at 15:08

    There is an excellent graphic included in the NYT piece here. Republicans are not about small government.

  7. Whymrhymer on February 18, 2005 at 19:59

    What's the point of damning one party or the other or one president or the other — the United States government's spending is out of control and has been for many years. Special interests are driving our government's spending through lobbiests — "the people" have lost control and will not regain it until we elect Senators and Congressmen that are not on the take . . . the ones that value the "old-fashioned" principle of serving the people.

  8. Richard Nikoley on February 18, 2005 at 20:14

    "What's the point of damning one party or the other or one president or the other — the United States government's spending is out of control and has been for many years. Special interests are driving our government's spending through lobbiests — "the people" have lost control and will not regain it until we elect Senators and Congressmen that are not on the take . . . the ones that value the "old-fashioned" principle of serving the people."

    You're pointing to a systemic problem, and you're dead right. So, take the next step. There is no fix. We elected congressmen and senators in 1994 who were "not on the take," and yet, today, they are. The problem is the whole system, and the only fix resides in the realm of ideas firmly grounded to reality.

  9. Senor Pez on February 23, 2005 at 10:10

    "1. Clinton left the country in recession after raising taxes 3 times before the corporate corruption bubble popped in 2000."

    Clinton also left us with a record budget surplus. This also runs against the Rebuplican rhetoric that the recession was caused by the September 11 attacks… so, which is it? And my taxes haven't changed one penny thanks to Bush's "sweeping" tax cuts.

    "2. Clinton let Osama bin Laden plan his terror for 9/11 during his 8 years in office after the first WTC attack in 1993 on his watch. Clinton never went to visit the site or contact family members who lost loved ones."

    That's right, blame the previous adminstrations again. Don't forget to toss in a reference to Torquemada while you're at it.

    "3. Clinton didn't have 2 big wars going on, but did attack Iraq citing the same information democrats now say Bush lied about given to him by his CIA appointee George Tenent who Bush fired!"

    There are not 2 big wars going on now, either. Last I checked, the only declared war was the invasion of Iraq. And I thought that President Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" on an aircraft carrier.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

YouTube1k
YouTube
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
40
45
Follow by Email8k
RSS780