Palmetto Pundit
Palmetto Bug,
Here, read this
Would true conservatives countenance the fiscal rape of their children and grandchildren?
One thing the Bush Administration clearly has been very good at is focusing the attention of the press (and by extension the American people) on issues that they want to highlight. This has had the effect of advancing the Bush agenda, but has had the added effect of deflecting focus away from things that the Administration does not want to highlight. One of those issues is clearly the rampant, runaway spending of your tax dollars by Bush and the Republican majority congress. At this point there can be no doubt that, as they try to focus your attention on issues like stem cells and Supreme Court nominations, Bush and the Republican Congress are spending us all into a hole from which it will take us, our children and our grandchildren years to recover.
You don’t need to take my word for this, nor the words of any democrat or Bush-hater. You need only to read what conservatives like George Will are saying, or the people at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. The Cato Institute recently completed a report on the spending habits of all US presidents during the last 40 years. If you’re interested in reading the report I’ve included a link at the end of this post.
If you want to continue to believe that Bush and Congressional Republicans are “on your side” or if you care only about saving stem cells and banning gay marriage perhaps you should read no further. But if you’re interested in the truth and are concerned about your financial well-being and that of your children, perhaps you should read on. Here’s some of what the Cato Institute report had to say about presidential spending over the last 40 years:
All presidents presided over net increases in spending. As it turns out George W. Bush is one of the biggest spenders of them all. In fact he is an even bigger spender than Lyndon B. Johnson in terms of discretionary spending.
The increase in discretionary spending in Bush’s first term was 48.5% in nominal terms. That’s more than twice as large as the increase in discretionary spending during Clinton’s entire 2 terms (21.6%) and higher than Lyndon B. Johnson’s entire discretionary spending spree (48.3%).
Adjusting the budget trends for inflation Bush looks even worse; his spending rate is much higher then Lyndon Johnson’s. In other words, Bush expanded federal non-entitlement programs in his first term almost twice as fast each year as Lyndon Johnson did during his entire presidency.
George W. Bush is the biggest spending president of the last 40 years in both the defense and discretionary spending categories by a long shot. He beats Johnson by almost 4% in defense spending growth and more than 3% in domestic discretionary spending growth.
And conservative columnist George Will points out that federal spending has grown twice as fast under Presiden
Phil,
I will not argue that Bush is a big spender and I do take issue with the administration on many of the issues you point out. Other than the tax cuts, he has been a moderate at best in my opinion. Unfortunately, your ability to stay on topic does not match your ability to rattle of statistics that are not relevant to the post. This post is about WMD. I am sick and tired of folks on both sides of the aisle saying the intelligence was faulty, that WMD was the only reason we invaded Iraq, etc. They have been proven to have been there and God knows Saddam had ample time to do what he wanted with them before we arrived. You obviously think you can read one of my posts and come to the conclusion that I am nothing more than a Kool-aid drinker or administration mouthpiece. Nothing could be further from the truth! I disagree with the administration, and in fact have on this blog, a number of times. As far as defense spending is concerned, that is about the only area I believe should ever be increased. It should receive whatever tax dollars are necessary to insure we have the ability to defeat any adversary at any time and at any place. Other than that, they can cut or eliminate practically any program in existence today and I would probably throw a party. Do not assume my passion for spreading the truth about Iraq constitutes ignorance on everything else. The fact is, Bush did not lie about WMD,and neither did Clinton or practically every other Democrat who now wants to change their tune in an attempt to gain political advantage. That was the point of this post. Many politicians could hardly wait for us not to find weapons so that they could throw it in the Administration's face and they want the American people to now believe they never existed. It was obvious Saddam had the upper hand in the inspection process. I'm just not that stupid!
Here's another one for ya!
News Item: Cheney Ratchets Up Verbal Assault on Majority of Americans
The Bush Administration this week continued to ratchet up its rhetoric against the 63% of Americans who disagree with Administration conduct of the war in Iraq and the 57% of Americans who believe that the Administration misused intelligence to justify their preconceived plans for the invasion of Iraq
Bush has called those who accused him of manipulating pre-war intelligence “deeply irresponsible.” Last week Vice President Cheney emerged from his bunker to label those who disagreed with his views as “dishonest and reprehensible” and further accused them of “cynical and pernicious falsehoods.” Yesterday Cheney, in a speech at the American Enterprise Institute, took the rhetoric up a notch, describing Americans who disagree with his opinions as “shameless and corrupt.”
Latest polls show Bush’s approval rating among Americans at 34% and further indicate that only 40% of Americans consider Bush to be “honest and ethical.” Cheney’s approval rating hovers at an abysmal 19%; only 29% of Americans consider Cheney to be “honest and ethical.” More importantly, polls this week show that 57% of Americans believe that Bush and Cheney deliberately misused pre-war intelligence to justify the Iraq invasion, 63% think that Bush is mismanaging the war effort, and that these percentages are continuing to increase. A further disquieting fact for the Administration is that most Americans, including even Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, believe that the Bush strategy in Iraq is creating new terrorists faster than we can kill them.
Critics are split on whether the Bush/Cheney strategy of calling the nearly two thirds of Americans that disagree with them “irresponsible, reprehensible and dishonest, shameless and corrupt” will help their approval ratings.
White House operatives are carefully watching the polls to determine if their policy of lashing out against the clear majority of Americans who disagree with them on Iraq moves public opinion back in their favor. If it does, sources indicate that they may be open to bolder initiatives. They are said to be considering reacting to the 89% of Americans polled who consider Cheney the “human embodiment of evil” by having Cheney call them “witless troglodytes.” Karl Rove is rumored to have suggested an even stronger reaction to the 78% of Americans polled who consider Bush to be an “amiable dunce,” having Bush refer to them as “pustulent whores.” Sources say that there is indecision about whether to have Scott McClellan or Ken Mehlman deliver the White House message that the 63% of Americans who think Bush is mismanaging the war are “gonadally challenged.”
In an increasingly bad sign for the Republicans, 67% of Americans polled responded that they viewed Pat Robertson as the “sole voice of reason” in the Republican Party, though those polling numbers were taken prior to Robertson calling for his
I am sick and tired of folks on both sides of the aisle saying the intelligence was faulty, that WMD was the only reason we invaded Iraq, etc.
Bush is just reaping what he sowed on this stuff, IMHO. He never disclosed that the intelligence re: WMDs was less than reliable. Instead, he hid intelligence that didn't conform to his goals. That strikes me as within the authority of the president, but he's responsible for his judgment to do so. He deserves all the heat he gets and then some.
Re: rationales: The president never clearly laid out why we went to war. He mentioned a bunch of stuff, but he never organized it into a coherent argument.
Commenting by HaloScan
