Tag Archives: George W. Bush

Time for Some Economic Truth Telling

I have something to say to the politicians and the buffoons in the media. “Enough with the lies and the spin and the mis-information! The fraud you are perpetrating on the American people is (or should be) criminal.” For years now, we’ve been told that Reagan ran massive deficits unnecessarily; that Bill Clinton created a surplus; that the Bush tax cuts of 2003 caused the current debt crisis; and my least favorite, that all we need today is tax increases to get out of our current fiscal mess. Using the chart above, and in only 800 words, I will completely disprove each of these idiotic opinions. They are progressive myths perpetrated in an attempt to justify an ever larger U.S. government. So in order:

The deficits of the Reagan years aren’t pretty, but they pale in comparison to the sheer madness of today and more importantly, they had a purpose. When Mr. Reagan took office the Country was in a quagmire financially and militarily and the policies of his administration brought us out of both and to new heights never seen before in America. During his entire Presidency, Democrats held a death grip on Congress and its purse-strings. They could have stopped all that ‘horrible spending’ any time they wanted to – they didn’t. Trust me when I say, I hate deficits, but as deficits go, these had a usefulness at least. Things were accomplished. For the debt incurred, the country gained peace with its greatest-ever threat, the Soviet Union as well as new-found economic prosperity.

Bill Clinton is the luckiest President in U.S. history. He was a philanderer in the only moment in history when one might get away with it – that is after the country gave up its morals and before blogs, twitter, facebook etc. which might have led to a very different outcome (look at Anthony Weiner – his actions were nothing compared to Mr. Clinton’s and he was ridden out of town on a rail). On the financial front, he rode an economic boom driven by the internet to government financial nirvana and he and his progressive friends continue to take credit for something they had virtually nothing to do with. Look at the chart; it’s right there in red and blue. From 1984 to 2000 Federal revenue more than doubled. Tax cuts from the 80’s and the resulting economic crescendo capped by the tech-boom drove federal tax receipts through the roof. Did he pay down the debt? Nope. Instead, Washington spent more money than ever before in the nation’s history. Though they tried very hard, Mr. Clinton’s administration couldn’t spend it all and a small surplus was left over.

Along comes President Bush. He campaigns on returning the American people’s money (remember now, despite the progressives’ slight of hand tactics to make you forget this fact, it is our money)  to them via tax cuts. Coupled with the tech bubble bursting and 9/11, this leads to a drop in Federal revenue and a return to annual deficits. But, wait; look what happens next. Revenues explode upward starting in 2004 and reach the highest in our nation’s history in 2007. How can this be? I’ve been told repeatedly that the Bush tax cuts ruined this country. I’m sure it must be true; I mean, MSNBC says so. Sorry, liberals, wrong again. Mr. Bush is not blameless however. He presided over a federal spending bonanza that out-paced all the income gains created by the tax cuts. But, Progressives don’t argue against the ‘Bush spending’ however. That wouldn’t work with their agenda of always spending more; so they say the tax cuts are to blame. Think what they are actually saying – “We wanted to spend all the money we did spend, PLUS all the money Bush gave back in tax cuts”. Incredible!

Last lie, “Tax increases will get us out of this”. What?!?! The current tax code is virtually identical to that of 2007. That means we have a tax system in place today that produced the largest single year Federal revenue in American history. That isn’t enough for them? They need more? Look at the chart again. In the imaginary years to come, Mr. Obama is counting on Federal income reaching all new highs. And even if it does, he still expects to run $500 and $600 BILLION deficits EVERY YEAR!  He wants to increase taxes in the hopes of increasing revenue (despite all the evidence that it doesn’t work that way), not to get our budget balanced and pay down some debt. No, that would be far too sensible for Washington. These morons want to increase spending even more. They want to go to all-new record levels of spending. I guess they’ve never heard of the idea of cutting back when times are tough.

There you have it; four lies of the left debunked. Where does that leave us? I’ll leave that for another time, but there are some lessons here for those willing to see. How does 2007 revenues with 1999’s spending sound? The result is a $900 billion annual surplus. $450 billion per year of that could go to debt reduction and $450 billion to replacing the money Washington has robbed from Social Security. That sounds like a good place to start.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Government Spending, Taxation

Revisionist History by the Boston Globe and Barney Frank

This week the Boston Globe and Representative Barney Frank (D – MA), two Massachusetts products for which its citizens should be wholly ashamed, took a laughable trip down revisionist history lane with regard to the housing bubble. The jumping off point for this latest rewrite by the Globe was the President’s announcement that he

plans to pump $4.25 billion of economic stimulus money into creating tens of thousands of federally subsidized rental units in American cities.

Forgetting the question of how $4.25 billion of our tax dollars get redirected from economic stimulus to liberal pet project without so much as a discussion, does no one recall the 1970’s fiasco that was the housing projects? I know Mr. Obama didn’t arrive in Chicago until the Chicago P.D. had finished fighting its WAR with the gangs who had taken over the projects in that city, but hasn’t someone in his cabinet studied the issue or maybe at least watched the History Channel?

Unfortunately, that memory lapse is only the beginning of the distortion in the Globe’s article. Just a couple paragraphs later, the author jumps the proverbial tracks and begins to rewrite history in a way that can only be described as nonsensical.

“I’ve always said the American dream should be a home – not homeownership,’’ said Representative Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and one of the earliest critics of the Bush administration’s push to put mortgages in the hands of low- and moderate-income people.

Interestingly Barney says he’s never been for home ownership, but here he is in 2005 saying he IS for home ownership while also saying he sees no housing bubble. Good call Barney!

I’m not sure how one gets a job writing for a major metropolitan newspaper, but clearly reading, studying, remembering even the recent past, citing facts, and/or having any idea what you are talking about are not requirements. The policy of pushing home ownership was begun by Jimmy Carter under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980. It was wildly expanded by Bill Clinton in 1994, under his National Homeownership Strategy, when Clinton directed HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros to come up with a plan. The Globe knows these things, but it isn’t the story they’d like to tell so they leave those details out.

Blaming George Bush for the housing bubble is laughable “journalism”. As a matter of FACT (stubborn things the Globe is not fond of nor familiar with) the Bush Administration tried desperately starting in 2001 to get Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulations dramatically tightened and told Congress that failure to act could be catastrophic to the financial system. Barney Frank and his Democratic pals sat there that day and said the Bush Administration was exaggerating. Barney actually said he saw no reason to believe Fannie and Freddie were headed for trouble and he said EVEN IF THEY DID GET IN TROUBLE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT  WOULDN’T BAIL THEM OUT! Don’t believe me, here’s the video of him saying it:

Barney, Barney, Barney. How dare you and your shills at the Boston Globe try to revise the story now. You and your Democratic colleagues had opportunities in 2001, 2003, and 2005 complete with warnings from the Treasury and the Fed on all 3 occasions to prevent this catastrophe. You failed your constituents and the American people at large. Hopefully the voters of Massachusetts will wake up and take your throne away from you.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

1 Comment

Filed under Financial, Random Senselessness

Anything Bad, Blame Him – Anything Good, Thank Me

Today in the White House Rose Garden President Obama claimed that his administration has saved the US economy from ‘catastrophe’. Hallelujah we’re saved! Yes, I am laughing hysterically as I type that. Along with his gigantic ego problem this President seems to also have a memory problem. You see, just 7 days ago, Mr. Obama once again trotted out his pitiful “blame my predecessor” defense coupled with the almost as weak, “this is going to take a long time to fix”. Members of his administration went on the Sunday morning talk shows and told us flat out that this was still President Bush’s economy. They told us that only a tiny, tiny fraction of the Obama stimulus package had been spent (one might ask why since it passed 5 months ago, but let’s not trifle). Now, a mere 7 days later, and while 9.4% of the U.S. population is unemployed and state and federal governments are running huge unsustainable deficits, Mr. Obama has decided everything is all better now.

Ok, he didn’t go quite that far, but his position and his audacity is no less prepostorous. I wonder what he’ll say next week if the jobs report or other economic news isn’t quite so upbeat? I wonder how many more times the American people will let him get away with blaming the other guy for bad news and taking credit for all the good news?

Leave a comment

Filed under Random Senselessness

Sorry, Nancy, That Is Not How It Works

“I don’t have anything more to say about it. I stand by my comment.” With those words Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives and the third in the line of succession to the Presidency of the United States, attempted to simply brush aside her outrageous behavior in recent weeks. Apparently, if you are a Democrat in Washington you can call the CIA liars, say you weren’t aware of something that you were aware of and bash the opposition for a policy you raised no objection to; then when the press starts asking tough questions you simply say, “I don’t have anything more to say about it”. I imagine there are just a few Republicans wishing those were the rules by which they were allowed to play.

Sometimes you just have to laugh at politicians and the words that come out of their mouths. Nancy Pelosi actually believes that it should be up to her what questions the press will ask her and when. Of course, that is understandable as the ‘in the bag media’ has done nothing to contradict that view for years now.

After spending the last several years hammering the Bush administration for its policy surrounding waterboarding it turns out that Speaker Pelosi knew the tactic was being used the entire time and did nothing to stop it. That in and of itself would be bad enough, but then the Speaker went further saying the CIA was lying and that she didn’t know. Only now it has been proven that she did, so in the end, she was lying when she called the CIA ‘liars’.

This is the behavior that the Speaker of the House believes she can simply brush under the rug because she doesn’t feel like talking about it anymore. Sorry, Nancy, that’s not how it works. Even if your friends in the main stream media once again fail to perform their duty as reporters and let you off the hook, the rest of us will not.

1 Comment

Filed under Congress, Ethics & Corruption

Excuses, Excuses

Our nation faces a crucial time in its history and our President keeps making excuses. He seems more concerned with protecting himself from blame and/or lowering expectations for what he and his administration will accomplish than he is with actually solving the dilemma. His two favorite excuses are that he inherited the current situation and that he has been in office for such a short period of time.  I’m sorry but neither of these excuses hold water.

I’m making a rule; effective immediately, no politician is ever again allowed to blame his or her predecessor for the present situation.  What gives me the authority to institute this rule?  Absolutely nothing except that I am a citizen and a taxpayer and as such I’m tired of my time and money being wasted by this useless exercise.  Every time a new administration takes over or a new party takes control of the Congress they spend the first couple years of their tenure blaming everything that goes wrong on their predecessor.  How does this help the American people?  The truth is that it’s never this simple either, but they count on the lack of Common Sense of the average voter and they know they can fool a lot of people with this drivel.

But back to the present situation… Mr. Obama would like to blame his predecessor for our present set of circumstances.  Does Mr. Bush share some of the responsibility?  Of course.  But the causes of the current economic situation go back DECADES covering at least 5 Presidential administrations and 16 sessions of Congress.  Democrats were in charge, Republicans were in charge, but to blame any one politician or even one party is juvenile and the President knows it.  He does it anyway because there are enough senseless people out there who will swallow it hook, line and sinker and will even ignorantly regurgitate it when their friend or co-worker dares to question Mr. Obama.

Bottom line, I don’t care who is to blame – not right now and not as it relates to how the American people should judge the performance of this White House.  President Obama ran a campaign of ludicrous over-the-top promises (as most politicians do today) claiming he was going to solve our problems – remember “Hope and Change”?  So, you promised Mr. President, time for you to deliver and I really don’t care what you inherited.  See, that’s the job.  Maybe you didn’t realize that due to your much over-looked utter inexperience, but President of the United States is where the buck stops!

The second excuse, that of how short a time he’s been in office, is even more outrageous than the first and extremely disingenuous.  President Obama was a U.S. Senator for the last 4 years, remember (you better, that was the grand total of his experience before becoming leader of the free world).  His run for President started more than two years ago and he had a responsibility while running for office to stay abreast of the issues.  After all, he was running for the job of handling these issues, was he not?  Lastly and perhaps most important for everyone to remember, the transition from the Bush to the Obama administration was the most transparent and inclusive in history.  The Obama team has had a “seat at the table” since mid-November.

Put down the excuses, Mr. President, and get to work.  You’ll succeed or you’ll fail, but stop trying to set the stage in case things don’t go your way.  America doesn’t have any time for that.

1 Comment

Filed under White House