Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48
  1. #1
    Grandmaster rambone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    'Merica
    Posts
    18,747

    Bush was no fiscal conservative

    Bush was no fiscal conservative, although he attempted to call himself one. Now our current big-spenders in Washington continue to paint Bush's brand of statism in the same way, in order to demonize all laissez-faire capitalism. In reality they are following all the same fiscal policies. Obama is Bush's 3rd term.

    Campaign For Liberty - 'W.' was no fiscal conservative

  2. #2
    I couldn't agree more he was no angel. I still am a little miffed at the Patriot Act myself opened up a can of worms that no one is in a hurry to close except the whole border security thingy that they drag their feet on.

  3. #3
    Grandmaster melensdad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Outside Lowellabama
    Posts
    18,315
    I thought it was OBVIOUS that both of the Bush's were big government types.

    The son may have been a social conservative but neither operated under the concept of limited government or fiscal constraint. However both look like penny pinchers COMPARED to the current Oval Office resident.

    I've never defended Bush (either of them) as good Presidents.

  4. #4
    Expert lashicoN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Northern Indiana
    Posts
    2,127
    I think it really was a lose/lose. McCain/Palin would probably also have been Bush's 3rd term. I'm pretty sure there was simply a puppet master(s) above Bush and now Obama. The face on the puppet was painted black, so that bought the puppet master a year or two before everyone realized "hey, that's the same puppet, you just painted his face and gave him a TelePrompter!".
    My past, here, is regrettable. I apologize.

  5. #5
    Seriously?! You're comparing Obama to Bush?!

    The Obamatard spends money like a coked-up valley girl on Rodeo Drive with her daddy's American Express Centurion Card.

    In less than two years, Barry has racked up more federal debt than all the administrations that came before him, combined. He's on the fast-track to spend more than all of them combined too.

    Bush may not have been a fiscal conservative, but Obama's free-spending ways (with other people's money) make ol' "Dubya" look like Ebenezer Scrooge.
    In God we trust. Everyone else... Keep your hands where I can see them.

  6. #6
    Plinker
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Lafayette
    Posts
    105
    One thing is certain, we won't be able to recover from our troubles until we have spending cuts. The only real difference I see between the two parties, fiscally-speaking, is that one lobbies tax cuts and the other does not. BOTH spend money like "daddy's girl with a credit card. Both are taking us to the same destination, the Weimar Republic.
    because topgunbobby@hotmail .com was a bad choice...

  7. #7
    Bush was very entrepreneurial but not necessarily a day to day operations manager. Look at his life. Any time he tried a business that was heavy on day to day operations, it failed. The only way he made money was by assembling deals and selling them, and making massive amounts of money that way. Read into the Texas Rangers deal he put together - it was a heck of a job putting that deal together the way he did, and the way he made money on it was selling the package after assembling it not by running it.

    His presidency was the same. He got Federal Gross revenue up to a historic high after 9/11, but he didn't manage the operations account with the same zeal as he operated money making. So they made a lot of money and spent the heck out of it.

    Obama's problem is he hasn't made a dollar in his life outside of selling ghostwritten autobiographies and fund raising, and he spends the heck out of money. He's like Bush's bad fiscal management without Bush's understanding of making money.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by TRWXXA View Post
    In less than two years, Barry has racked up more federal debt than all the administrations that came before him, combined.
    Proof please.

  9. #9
    Grandmaster rambone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    'Merica
    Posts
    18,747
    Quote Originally Posted by TRWXXA View Post
    Seriously?! You're comparing Obama to Bush?!
    Yes.

    Bush set a new all-time spending record. So did Obama. Spending needs to be pulled back dramatically before we go bankrupt.

    Bush thought spending tax-payer money on government "stimulus" projects would boost the economy. So did Obama. The government cannot stimulate anything without first hurting someone else.

    Bush thought bailing out companies with tax-dollars would somehow fix their failed business-models. So did Obama. Companies need to fix their wild spending problems and leave the taxpayers out of it.

    Bush engaged us in years of expensive foreign wars. So is Obama. And leaving 50,000+ troops on the ground can hardly be considered the end of a war.

    Bush signed a law that increased the government's involvement in the health care system. So did Obama. The government's involvement is what makes the system so expensive.

    Bush created new government agencies. So did Obama. Government needs to shrink drastically to constitutional levels.


    Defending Bush in any way, shape, or form will be a fruitless endeavor. Bush and Obama are both statists. People need to back up and realize that Obama is one tyrant in a long line of tyrants. They are all front-men & fall-guys for the folks behind the scenes, taking this country on a path to destruction. The names change, the course stays the same.

  10. #10

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •