View Full Version : Fiscal Conservatives Challenge Bush
Matrim55
10 Sep 2004, 02:32 PM
The ******** is starting to hit the fan in BushCamp. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&e=19&u=/nm/campaign_promises_dc)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush, who accuses his Democratic rival of keeping his budget plans secret, has yet to offer plans of his own for funding his campaign promises and cutting the deficit in half, fiscal conservatives said on Friday.
...
But even fiscal conservatives, traditionally allied with the Republican White House, were skeptical of Bush's plans.
"While it's true that Kerry hasn't provided a detailed plan, neither has the president," said Heritage Foundation budget analyst Brian Riedl.
William Niskanen, chairman of the Cato Institute, said Bush's warnings about Kerry's spending plans were "inconsistent" with his own proposals. "There's no way to accomplish (Bush's) major new measures, including tax reform, without substantial increases in spending," Niskanen said.
When a Republican president's got the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute calling bullshit, you know his campaign is sinking. Enjoy your 42% of the electorate, boys.
Lanky134
10 Sep 2004, 02:34 PM
The ******** is starting to hit the fan in BushCamp. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&e=19&u=/nm/campaign_promises_dc)
When a Republican president's got the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute calling bullshit, you know his campaign is sinking. Enjoy your 42% of the electorate, boys.
Nah, they're just attempting to keep him honest. They'll still vote for him.
Claymore
10 Sep 2004, 02:34 PM
Look! Over there! A terrorist!
Dr. Wankler
10 Sep 2004, 02:38 PM
It won't make a difference. I heard most of Pres. Bush's speech from West Virginia, and the loudest cheer came when he talked about the sanctity of marriage and family. Now, given that marriages and family are going to be much, much harder to hold together in the near future because of major financial problems brought about by deficit spending, that's not what anyone was worrying about. They were hopeful that, if Bush is re-elected, there will be fewer men holding hands in San Francisco and New York. I don't think the general electorate gives a crap about this.
dawgpound2
10 Sep 2004, 02:41 PM
I ama staunch fiscal conservative. I don't like much of what Bush has done in that arena.
I will vote for GWB because of (in order, seperated for effect)
1-abortion
2-war on terror
3-fiscal policy (still far better than Kerry's)
Dr. Wankler
10 Sep 2004, 02:46 PM
I ama staunch fiscal conservative. I don't like much of what Bush has done in that arena.
I will vote for GWB because of (in order, seperated for effect)
1-abortion
2-war on terror
3-fiscal policy (still far better than Kerry's)
Bravo. We must never, ever forget the sanctity of the fetus.
Matrim55
10 Sep 2004, 02:49 PM
Bravo. We must never, ever forget the sanctity of the fetus.
It's too bad those fetuses dp2 and gwb are so concerned about are going to end up being born into a third-world country.
Chris M.
10 Sep 2004, 02:51 PM
I ama staunch fiscal conservative. I don't like much of what Bush has done in that arena.
I will vote for GWB because of (in order, seperated for effect)
1-abortion
2-war on terror
3-fiscal policy (still far better than Kerry's)
I respect that opinion, but the question remains, in 4 years, what has he done in all three areas?
On 1 you are probably just holding out hope that he gets to appoint a judge or two in the next four years. Other than that, all you get is flowery rhetoric about the sanctity of life.
On 2 there is obviously a legit debate going on. I posted a thread yesterday about the state of our port security as an example of how we are still vulnerable in areas where we really should be more secure three years removed from 9/11. Still, I respect those that think Bush is stronger here than Kerry.
On 3, it is a Republican congress, and they are spending like sailors on shore leave the day after payday. Would kerry make things worse? I'm not so sure, but I think there is probably little difference between the two on deficits. The difference will be a shift on who receives the benefits of our current ridiculous deficits.
I am fiscally conservative as well, and I still bristle when I think back to Bush in 2000 saying "we need to give some of this surplus back to the people that pay the bills."
Fine. If we continue to run surplusses for years, and pay down the already existing debt.
Dr. Wankler
10 Sep 2004, 02:59 PM
It's too bad those fetuses dp2 and gwb are so concerned about are going to end up being born into a third-world country.
That's pretty much my worry, too. By the way, here's a story on the Vatican's clarification, yesterday, of the position that ItN and others made such a big deal about when some American Bishops were calling for the witholding of communion from Kerry and anyone who votes for him.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/152/story_15235_1.html
And for the record, Cardinal Ratzinger is not referred to as "Cardinal Kumbaya" by anyone at all. He's about as staunch a conservative as you can get. And he realizes there are complexities about all these issues.
I also like Chris M's point about appointing a judge or two. For all the lipservices republicans pay to pro-life issues, they're pretty ineffective about doing anything about it. Why? 1) many of their more libertarian-leaning (and wealthier) constituents favor abortion and 2) it, along with gay rights issue, is such a good rallying cry that they don't want to do away with it, what with these issues being so good at distracting people from their own economic interests.
dawgpound2
10 Sep 2004, 03:00 PM
It's too bad those fetuses dp2 and gwb are so concerned about are going to end up being born into a third-world country.
We've been a third world country since Roe v. Wade was enacted.
Benito
10 Sep 2004, 03:01 PM
The ******** is starting to hit the fan in BushCamp. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&e=19&u=/nm/campaign_promises_dc)
When a Republican president's got the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute calling bullshit, you know his campaign is sinking. Enjoy your 42% of the electorate, boys.
Kerry is losing all the swing states except 1 and he is only 1 point a head in that state. Now tell me again who's campaign is sinking? Do you think any republican will vote for Mr. Liberal Kerry for any reason?
Dr. Wankler
10 Sep 2004, 03:02 PM
We've been a third world country since Roe v. Wade was enacted.
Will you kindly explain this?
Matrim55
10 Sep 2004, 03:02 PM
Will you kindly explain this?
If he does, I bet it'll make my eyes bleed.
BlueMeanie
10 Sep 2004, 03:05 PM
Do you think any republican will vote for Mr. Liberal Kerry for any reason?
I will. Bush has done everything possible to tell me, and most anyone else who voted for him in 2000 besides corporations and the uber-wealthy, not to do so again.
(Then again, between Bush and the sham of a California recall/election, I'm not sure I'll ever register Republican again.)
Lanky134
10 Sep 2004, 03:06 PM
Do you think any republican will vote for Mr. Liberal Kerry for any reason?
I know at least six, and that includes my father.
Garcia
10 Sep 2004, 03:08 PM
It's too bad those fetuses dp2 and gwb are so concerned about are going to end up being born into a third-world country.
I wonder if you have ever been to a 3rd world country.
The USA is quite nice.
dawgpound2
10 Sep 2004, 03:08 PM
Will you kindly explain this?
It's simple for me. I believe life begins at the moment of conception, therefore abortion is murder.
Any society that endorses and makes legal murder is worse than third world to me.
BlueMeanie
10 Sep 2004, 03:10 PM
Any society that endorses and makes legal murder is worse than third world to me.
But you of course have no problem with then-governor Bush murdering inmates, even retarded ones.
Matrim55
10 Sep 2004, 03:13 PM
I wonder if you have ever been to a 3rd world country.
The USA is quite nice.
I have, and give it four years.
Dr. Wankler
10 Sep 2004, 03:14 PM
Any society that endorses and makes legal murder is worse than third world to me.
So, you're opposed to capital punishment, I presume?
And just curious, does your dislike of abortion take into account, in any way, the men who play a role in conceiving these unborn children? I ask because I find most anti-abortion rhetoric to be misogynistic at its core, and you know... it takes two to conceive. Yet I've never come across anyone who's anti-abortion willing to take a stand against men who also play a part in all this. It's always women's fault, in other words.