PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
deep end.....over $700billion in one shot....it was almost Obamaesque....
have democrats or liberals ever reduced taxes for everyone?
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
Iraq cost even more, also bushesque?
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I'll give you war as Bushesque ......handing taxpayer money to banks or spending trillions to build museums.....that's Obamaesque.....
Should I just link to the beginning of the thread? Seriously, we've been through this before. As I said, it is as if the past has no lasting effect on you.
Not really, it is still a bit less spent in Iraq, and that was over 5 years. In one shot, plus the year before the TARP supported by Bush and about 3 (exaggerating) other republicans... Over 1 Trillion in just a few months spent largely by Ds in Congress...
Nah, see Afghanistan to see of war is Obamaesque. Just as poorly run as Bush in Iraq until he finally did the surge...
It wasn't me. I voted Libertarian, because this dude was an oxymoron, a "big government republican"... Those people (Nixon was one) spend us into the poor house.
C
Cancel5
Guest
It is not that we like taxes, it is just a necessary evil! One who dances to the music must pay the piper!
C
Cancel5
Guest
The libs answer is that Republicans cut taxes without cutting the budget, not a prudent thing to do! We need cuts along with cuts! Not cuts along with spending.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
you must mean LIBertarian then rather than LIBeral.....liberals would never "cut" the budget....
Who was the last small government republican? I can think of none, rhetoric excluded.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
my Congressman is still there......Pete Hoekstra....
Are you talking about a balanced budget or smaller government? Eisenhower balanced the budget in 3 of 8 years, was the government smaller when he left? I have my doubts.
"Geebus", your memory apparently doesn't extend to the line above your replies.
Hoekstra has balanced which budget and made which government smaller? Beliefs are one thing, acccomplishments another. What part of Michigan is that?
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
if you don't believe something, you certainly aren't going to accomplish it....he's got a consistent voting record on reducing spending....he was a freshman in the Gingrich congress so he voted for the only balanced budget we've had in my recollection......
Eisenhower had to work within the congress like any other President, pretending that Presidents are somehow capable of doing everything they want to do just because they believe a certain way is childish and silly and beneath anybody who pays attention enough to post on a site like this.
Just as Reagan wanted to cut back on programs in the government but had a D Congress so he needed to use give and take. He was able to get them to approve increasing military expenditures that crippled the USSR and helped bring an end to the cold war, he had to give up on other portions of what he wanted to do. It's this thing called compromise that happens with our system.
I don't call him a "small government" Republican, because of the compromises he made that actually grew the government, although I do support what he was able to do with those compromises.
Eisenhower was the last President, and most knowledgeable about it, to speak about the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex and the fact that if we didn't watch we'd be in debt to our eyebrows. He was right. He was the last of the small government leaders we've had. And it is a shame.
C
Cancel5
Guest
He was right, where is the general when we need him...
Eisenhower had to work within the congress like any other President, pretending that Presidents are somehow capable of doing everything they want to do just because they believe a certain way is childish and silly and beneath anybody who pays attention enough to post on a site like this.
Just as Reagan wanted to cut back on programs in the government but had a D Congress so he needed to use give and take. He was able to get them to approve increasing military expenditures that crippled the USSR and helped bring an end to the cold war, he had to give up on other portions of what he wanted to do. It's this thing called compromise that happens with our system.
I don't call him a "small government" Republican, because of the compromises he made that actually grew the government, although I do support what he was able to do with those compromises.
Eisenhower was the last President, and most knowledgeable about it, to speak about the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex and the fact that if we didn't watch we'd be in debt to our eyebrows. He was right. He was the last of the small government leaders we've had. And it is a shame.
You are correct, I phrased my question too broadly, however with all the Presidents since Eisenhower? and all the members of Congress since???, finding only Hoekstra is pretty slim pickings isn't it? Somewhat like finding OSHA as the only pro-worker legislation signed by a GOP prez, even though it was created by Johnson and passed by a Dem Congress (and given short-shrift by every GOP Executive since).
What is Hoekstra's executive status in the GOP? I will admit Hoekstra has been consistent and less shrill than some on his side of the aisle.
You said it for me. His own party certainly hasn't given one iota of thought to the Eisenhower admonition and when a Democrat discusses or implements it, he is automatically labeled a traitor by the Chickenhawks in Eisenhower's own
party. Thus we have inherited the consequences we deserve.