Scott McClellen- "Bush is a Fiscal Conservative"

[PanTheMan]

Scott McClellen, White House Press Secratary, today said President Bush is a 'Fiscal Conservative.' Even more so than Reagan, and possibly in the last 100 years.

Could one of you Bushies Please Explain How Is Bush a Fiscal Conservative? I am at a loss for words after hearing this....

[wendybeth]

Because he says he is.

(I know, I'm not a Bushie, but there you have it).

[PanTheMan]

Tax Cuts for the Wealthy (To Stimulate the economy ;) so far the only 'stimulation' is a bunch of CEO's Golf games ) 200 Billion in Iraq (So Far) 200 Billion on Katrina, over 1 TRILLION in Debt when we had surplus just five years ago, growing at an astounding rate. No new taxes to pay for anything, and now thay call him a 'Fiscal Conservative'... Doesn't this worry anyone?

Is Reality that far out of whack??

[scaeagles]

First of all, Bush is no fiscal conservative, and I suppose you would refer to me as a "Bushie".

Tax cuts have stimulated the economy. Always have, always will. The Reagan years are the perfect example of this. They also brought us out of the economic downturn that started 9 months or so prior to Bush taking office in 2001.

The deficit problem is one of spending, not of taxation. Cutting income taxes does little to affect the wealthy. They have their wealth sheltered and structured in ways as to pay the smallest amount of taes possible. The problem isn't the rate of taxation. The problem is the tax code, and if you want to rewrite it, I'm with you. Messing with income tax rates only affects that that are attempting to acquire wealth, not those that have it already.

Looking at the deficit as a percentage of GDP, as most economists do, it is well below what it has been historically.

It has been shown that the so-called surplus was from accounting tricks commonly used to make a bottom line look better. I can try to find appropriate links if anyone cares to see them. Also, they were "projected surpluses", and nothing real had yet materialized. I can "project" anything I like.

[Morrigoon]

You know who income taxes REALLY hurt? High income earners, not the wealthy (yes, there's a difference) People like doctors and lawyers who spent years in very expensive schooling to get where they are and who have to go to work every day to make the money they do... THAT's who it hurts.

The wealthy? They're investors. The last thing you wanna do is hurt investors (talk about a way to cause a recession!) But if your politicians can fool you into thinking they're "sticking it to the rich guy" by hurting high income-earners, then apparently that's enough to get your vote, which is all they care about. All you're really doing is perpetuating the gap between the rich and poor. Every time you try to "hurt" the rich, you're really hurting the guy in the middle or the guy on his way up, who don't have the money for the fancy accountants and other advisors to help him get all the cuts he deserves. All you're doing is making it harder for anyone else to get rich.

And I really don't believe anyone who spends the way Bush does is a fiscal conservative.

[Nephythys]

If he would just veto something! The pork in the highway bill, farm bill, etc etc!!!

Say NOOOOO to the spending!

[sleepyjeff]

Follow this line of logic:

If it is true that the Republicans get their support from the rich then it would follow that it would be in their best interest for the country to be comprised of as many rich people as possible.....

If it is true that the Dems get their support from the little guy then it would follow that it would be in their best interest for the country to be comprised of as many little guys as possible.....

[Not Afraid]

One can claim to be a Fiscal Conservative but that does not mean one has to actually ACT like a Fiscal Conservative.

But, it sounds nice - especially with the Regan reference thrown in.

[innerSpaceman]

Shouldn't this be in the Orwellian double-speak thread?

[Not Afraid]

Maybe we need an entire forum devoted to Orwellian Double-Speak?

[scaeagles]

That would be double plus good.

[PanTheMan]

Follow this line of logic:

If it is true that the Republicans get their support from the rich then it would follow that it would be in their best interest for the country to be comprised of as many rich people as possible.....

If it is true that the Dems get their support from the little guy then it would follow that it would be in their best interest for the country to be comprised of as many little guys as possible.....

Back in 2000, when Bush was first running for President and the subject of his 'average' grades came up, several news agencies of course were scrambling to find them or find teachers who taught the Future President.
One station brought on this old as dust Yale Poli Sci teacher who remebered Bush had written a paper endorsing a 2 class system rather than the 3 class system. He wrote that a ruling class and a serving class politically were easier to control. As the Wealthy has Increased by 14%, and those in Poverty have increased 26% since his taking office, it does seem the middle class grows thinner.

living in Walnut Creek, Most of my freinds and neighbors are Republicans. My sister and Brother-in-law are Republicans, my Father was a die-hard Republican. So how did I end up going so wrong? (lol) my Grandparents were Dems and so is my Aunt who for years worked in Social Work. Them and my travels around the globe made me relize that the human race will always strive to be wealthy, and be better, but it is the weakest, those in need that define us. That test us. I Do believe society is a chain that is only as strong as it's weakest link. I DO NOT agree with many freinds and neighbors (and family) that the poor 'get what they deserve in life because they are lazy' etc... Things like AIDS, suffering, disasters, and poverty, who some believe are sent from God to 'punish', I believe are NOT sent from God to punish, but sent from god to test out compassion as a human race. WAY too many fail. Some fail even in the name of God.

I do think though after this coming election in November I will register as an independant though. I am getting tired of the FAR left railroading the party. Stil thinking about that one. If the Moderates continue to leave the Dems and GOP, we will leave those parties to the whack jobs. Probably not a good thing.

[sleepyjeff]

^^That's nice. You should join the Republicans because they are for everybody doing better and better whereas the dems would prefer their be a nice small elite class and then a large "head count" that they can control by way of entitlements.

[lizziebith]

^^That's nice. You should join the Republicans because they are for everybody doing better and better whereas the dems would prefer their be a nice small elite class and then a large "head count" that they can control by way of entitlements.

Wow. EVERYBODY doing better and better? I've NEVER gotten that feeling from the GOP. Entitlements seem to be THEIR specialty.

I'm NOT a democrat, BTW.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

^^That's nice. You should join the Republicans because they are for everybody doing better and better whereas the dems would prefer their be a nice small elite class and then a large "head count" that they can control by way of entitlements.

So why has the poverty rate gone up every year that Bush has been in office?

[sleepyjeff]

So why has the poverty rate gone up every year that Bush has been in office?

Bush only gets 4 years when the dems had 60 to fight poverty...that's fair?

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I'm not sure I see your point. Could you expand a bit? :)

[sleepyjeff]

I'm not sure I see your point. Could you expand a bit? :)

The war on poverty started with FDR something like 65 years ago. It has cost us trillions upon trillions of dollars but has not caused the poverty rate to go down much at all. It has however managed to destroy many a family unit. Republicans have only had both houses of congress in conjunction with the White House for the last 4.5 years. I submit that the war on poverty is not a war on poverty but is a kinda slavery. Kinda like rescuing a bird with an injured wing and feeding it and keeping it safe from predators but never letting it fly away.

[Nephythys]

6.6 trillion if I am not mistaken-

6.6 TRILLION for a war on poverty-wow

[€uroMeinke]

War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Terror - perhaps the "war" model isn't working out for us, maybe we should try something else?

[lizziebith]

War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Terror - perhaps the "war" model isn't working out for us, maybe we should try something else?


BEST. POLITICAL POST. EVER.

:snap: :snap: :snap: :snap: :snap:

[sleepyjeff]

War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Terror - perhaps the "war" model isn't working out for us, maybe we should try something else?

How about lazier faire?

[Morrigoon]

Here's a thought about the shrinking middle class...

Getting back to what I said earlier about democrats' claims of "Making the rich pay their fair share" only really affecting high-income earners. The democrats piss and moan about the widening gap between the rich and the poor, but it seems every initiative they promise will get the "rich" guy actually hurts those in the middle, thus further widening the gap, which they then complain about to get more votes.

[Prudence]

Here's a thought about the shrinking middle class...

Getting back to what I said earlier about democrats' claims of "Making the rich pay their fair share" only really affecting high-income earners. The democrats piss and moan about the widening gap between the rich and the poor, but it seems every initiative they promise will get the "rich" guy actually hurts those in the middle, thus further widening the gap, which they then complain about to get more votes.

While I actually agree with the above, I also wanted to note that Republican promises of "middle class tax cuts" also seem to miss their target. At least they always missed our family, and we were neither impoverished nor rich, thus leaving a presumption that we were middle class. What really happens to the middle class is that they make too much to benefit from anyone's proposals to help the poor, and they make too little to benefit from the magic of investments and economy-stimulating tax cuts. They always take the fall and they never get the burden.

I wonder how much of our economic trouble today is due to this vanishing middle class. We're left with the upper class that doesn't have to pay and the lower class that can't pay. It's an over simplification and I'm not an economist, so it's just a little theory.

[Morrigoon]

I'm at the bottom, and I got like $300 back from the gov't - extra!

[Morrigoon]

While I actually agree with the above, I also wanted to note that Republican promises of "middle class tax cuts" also seem to miss their target. At least they always missed our family, and we were neither impoverished nor rich, thus leaving a presumption that we were middle class. What really happens to the middle class is that they make too much to benefit from anyone's proposals to help the poor, and they make too little to benefit from the magic of investments and economy-stimulating tax cuts. They always take the fall and they never get the burden.

I wonder how much of our economic trouble today is due to this vanishing middle class. We're left with the upper class that doesn't have to pay and the lower class that can't pay. It's an over simplification and I'm not an economist, so it's just a little theory.

It's because everyone's so concerned with giving breaks or benefits to people who don't "deserve" it, that they put such strict restrictions on things, and in the end, are willing to deny things to people that "need" them, just to be sure they don't give anything to those that "don't". Thus, they leave the middle class high and dry.

[Prudence]

It's because everyone's so concerned with giving breaks or benefits to people who don't "deserve" it, that they put such strict restrictions on things, and in the end, are willing to deny things to people that "need" them, just to be sure they don't give anything to those that "don't". Thus, they leave the middle class high and dry.

Let's see -- I'll just be old enough for the 08 election. Wanna be my running mate? :evil:

[Morrigoon]

A Capitalist and a Socialist on the same ticket.... now THAT's bipartisan!

Actually I'm not old enough for the presidential ticket for some time yet (like, say, about 16.5 years)

I sometimes toy with the idea of running for local office, but I figure I'd better get my credit/debt stuff straightened out first.

[Prudence]

I don't think I'm a socialist, but let's revisit this in, say, 20 years? Give us time to make names for ourselves. In the meantime, folks from the LoT can say they knew us when!

[scaeagles]

And we would admit to this why?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Actually I'm not old enough for the presidential ticket for some time yet (like, say, about 16.5 years)You can say 16.5 years all you want...it won't make you 18 1/2 years old again. :p (I think you maybe meant 6.5 years?)

[Morrigoon]

Don't you have to be 45?

[scaeagles]

That would be 35.

[Morrigoon]

I thought that was for Governor... man, I'm mixed up, eh?

[Prudence]

And we would admit to this why?

Kickbacks, of course! Isn't that the point of government?

[Morrigoon]

Huh, wiki says 35, whaddya know.

Of course... you have to have been a resident for 14 years. If they mean 14 years immediately prior to running, then I can't run until after 2009. (5 months in England, you know ;)) OTOH... I never really stopped being a legal resident of CA during that time, did I?

[Prudence]

So does that mean we're back on for 08?

[scaeagles]

Thanks for doubting my basic constitutional knowledge.

[Morrigoon]

scaeagles: sorry dude, I was so comfortable with my own, LOL... but hey, at least I'm willing to be wrong!

I still toy with the idea of going for like some local city government or something.

[Not Afraid]

Step 1 to becomming President: Know how old you have to be to run. ;)

[PanTheMan]

Only have to be 35 to be president.... As for Millionaires in congress, I do believe Dems outnumbered the GOP at last check. I think some politicians do try to look out for their people, but to some "Their people" means their money people.

Seen the New Energy Bill? There is a hybred Lexus SUV that sells for $240k. You get a Tax break if you by this car. It gets 28 miles to the gallon! However you DO NOT get a tax break if you Buy a Honda Civic (42 Miles per Gallon) or even a Toyota PRIUS (65 Miles per gallon!) They say it is an "Insentive" for luxury buyers to be more envoromently friendly.
Another part of the Bill that made people want to puke was If you installed this certain type of energy effciant refrigerater you would get a tax break. One Problem It has to be installed in a home with a property value OVER $2.5 Million.


A Capitalist and a Socialist on the same ticket.... now THAT's bipartisan!

Actually I'm not old enough for the presidential ticket for some time yet (like, say, about 16.5 years)

I sometimes toy with the idea of running for local office, but I figure I'd better get my credit/debt stuff straightened out first.

[Prudence]

Step 1 to becomming President: Know how old you have to be to run. ;)

I would just like to point out that *I* know how old one must be to be President. Although I can't remember if you have to reach that age before the vote or before the actual inauguration.

[scaeagles]

Morrigoon - the sad product of our education system.

[wendybeth]

One can claim to be a Fiscal Conservative but that does not mean one has to actually ACT like a Fiscal Conservative.

But, it sounds nice - especially with the Regan reference thrown in.

May be he's fiscally conservative on the homefront. You know, one of those rich dudes that only tip 5%, or pay their illegal immigrant housekeepers $2 an hour. I would believe that.

[PanTheMan]

I would just like to point out that *I* know how old one must be to be President. Although I can't remember if you have to reach that age before the vote or before the actual inauguration.


Hey now...she knows.... Maybe she is just trying to lie about her age?....lol...wink, wink... ;)