The GOP vs Fiscal Conservatism

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Charlie Cook and others are predicting a sea-change in public mood, with support for the GOP rising because of deficits. This strikes me as an amazing thing. It makes Charlie Brown, the football and Lucy look like the model of intelligent interaction. If you believe in fiscal conservatism, the last place on earth you should look for salvation is the GOP. They have single-handedly destroyed America's finances since the 1980s, with the sole exception of George H W Bush, who was rejected by his own party precisely because of his fiscal sobriety. The current debt is overwhelmingly inherited by Obama, and it would have been nuts to enter office in the downdraft of the sharp recession and set about cutting spending. Bush had eight years to restrain it and he didn't. He let it rip. Think of the GOP's phony concerns about the cost of the current healthcare bill and compare it with the GOP's prescription drug entitlement that Rove rammed through the Congress when the GOP held total power. The costs then were about eight times as great as the proposed costs now. But that was a Republican measure and so it doesn't somehow count as evidence of fiscal irresponsibility. But Nancy Pelosi only has to raise an eye-brow and the alarms go off.

Somehow - thanks in part to dishonest partisan hacks like Glenn Reynolds and Sean Hannity - the Bush-Cheney debt is all Obama's fault and you need to get Republicans back to fix it. A commenter on Bruce Bartlett's Forbes column has the best response to that:

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

Which, of course, is still a problem. But nothing like the fiscal lunacy of the GOP.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...nservatism.html

[Pooky 3,809]

Charlie Cook and others are predicting a sea-change in public mood, with support for the GOP rising because of deficits. This strikes me as an amazing thing. It makes Charlie Brown, the football and Lucy look like the model of intelligent interaction. If you believe in fiscal conservatism, the last place on earth you should look for salvation is the GOP. They have single-handedly destroyed America's finances since the 1980s, with the sole exception of George H W Bush, who was rejected by his own party precisely because of his fiscal sobriety. The current debt is overwhelmingly inherited by Obama, and it would have been nuts to enter office in the downdraft of the sharp recession and set about cutting spending. Bush had eight years to restrain it and he didn't. He let it rip. Think of the GOP's phony concerns about the cost of the current healthcare bill and compare it with the GOP's prescription drug entitlement that Rove rammed through the Congress when the GOP held total power. The costs then were about eight times as great as the proposed costs now. But that was a Republican measure and so it doesn't somehow count as evidence of fiscal irresponsibility. But Nancy Pelosi only has to raise an eye-brow and the alarms go off.

Somehow - thanks in part to dishonest partisan hacks like Glenn Reynolds and Sean Hannity - the Bush-Cheney debt is all Obama's fault and you need to get Republicans back to fix it. A commenter on Bruce Bartlett's Forbes column has the best response to that:

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

Which, of course, is still a problem. But nothing like the fiscal lunacy of the GOP.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...nservatism.html

So, on the one hand, a ** partisan hack takes a sweeping, unsupported swipe at a couple of Republican't partisan hacks, without bothering to back up his statement at all. Which is just lame.

Then he tries to establish the incumbent administration as fiscally responsible, on the basis that all the preceding administrations of the same party managed the budget well, despite all the evidence currently at hand that this administration isn't even trying. Regardless of the reasons and motivations for it, the current administration is set on a path to such an overwhelming deficit that the USA might just pay it off before a newbie on the list would get a Green Bay Packers season ticket. And the author blithely asserts that the ** party is the party of fiscal conservatism.

It may well have been in the past. Right now, it looks rather like a first time homebuyer finding out that their dream home is no more than a money pit. What a sad piece of carp journalism.

[dalegg 143]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

So what do we call the party that's in power now? What can you say about a guy who complains about inheriting a deficit from the previous administration of $1.3 trillion (more than half of which came from a bailout plan that he supported ) and then promises to cut this deficit in HALF by the end of his first term as if this is some sort of accomplishment??! Half of 1.3 trillion dollars is 650 billion dollars, which is higher than ANY deficit ran under the previous administration other than the last year which as noted was caused by the bailout plan. I would hope he isn't putting in a 700 billion dollar bailout plan as part of his normal year to year budget plan, so why does it even take 4 years?? Why doesn't it take 1 or 2 years? This is fiscal responsibility?? What the hell am I missing?

[Ban Hammer 13,406]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

[dalegg 143]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

I swear, I cannot believe this bizarro nonsense they are spewing. They are actually saying this, and people are buying it. They aren't hiding anything! Look, this is right from Tim Geithner's testimony-

"We project that the deficit for the current fiscal year, including the recovery and stability plans, will be $1.75 trillion, or 12.3% of GDP. Of that, $1.3 trillion, or 9.2% of GDP, was already in place when we assumed office.

The President is determined to cut this $1.3 trillion deficit by at least half in four years. This would bring the deficit down to $533 billion by fiscal year 2013. More importantly, it would reduce the deficit to about 3% of GDP.

By bringing the deficit down to the range of 3% of GDP, we can keep our national debt – the aggregate total of our past deficits – from growing faster than the economy itself and keep the size of our debt relative to the economy from rising towards the end of our ten year budget window.

Failure to reduce deficits to this level would result in higher interest rates as government borrowing crowds out private investment, leading to slower growth and lower living standards for Americans. " oh, I see. Now $533 is a good level. Just a year ago it was the most horrible thing that any President had ever done to the economy, but now its just great. Awesomeness, so in 4 years from now if everything goes as planned the yearly deficit will be higher than any year Bush had, and this guy is "fiscally conservative?" And people are buying this? Still gonna be because of the Republicans I guess?

TG-47

Edited September 10, 2009 by dalegg

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

Seriously. Talk about having blinders on.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

[Ban Hammer 13,406]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

apparently you do believe that #######.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

apparently you do believe that #######.

Facts are ####### to you, Charles? Wow.

[Ban Hammer 13,406]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

apparently you do believe that #######.

Facts are ####### to you, Charles? Wow.

you just keep right on thinking the dems (or any political party) is so responsible with money.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

apparently you do believe that #######.

Facts are ####### to you, Charles? Wow.

you just keep right on thinking the dems (or any political party) is so responsible with money.

Debating fundamentals - present your argument with facts. I gave you facts. Now it's your turn to refute those facts with substance.

This might help you.

Debating 101: how to win a political debate

[HAL 9000 96]

[dalegg 143]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

Carter handled it with Inflation

Clinton handled it with a Republican Congress.

But neither is consequential. None of any previous Democratic Presidents' fiscal conservatism or any previous Republican President's unconservatism means this particular Administration is fiscal. Its not, and how it can claim to be makes my head spin. Last night was the last speech I'll ever listen to from the group.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We already have at least one party of fiscal responsibility. It's called the Democratic Party.

you don't really believe that bs, do you?

You skimmed over the meat of it, Charles...

The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP less than when he entered was Richard Nixon (FY 1975). The last Republican who left the office of the presidency with a federal deficit less than 2.7% of GDP was Dwight Eisenhower (FY 1961). Since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with the federal public debt as a percentage of GDP more than when he entered. And since WW II no Democratic president has ever left office with a federal deficit more than 2.6% of GDP.

....

Care to refute those facts?

Carter handled it with Inflation

Clinton handled it with a Republican Congress.

But neither is consequential. None of any previous Democratic Presidents' fiscal conservatism or any previous Republican President's unconservatism means this particular Administration is fiscal. Its not, and how it can claim to be makes my head spin. Last night was the last speech I'll ever listen to from the group.

Look, we either give credit or assign Federal fiscal responsibility to presidents or we don't. It's granted that Congress is part of the equation, but in terms of looking at how well presidents in the past have handled federal spending and taxes, this is nothing new. And given that historically we do make that connection then looking at the track record between Republican and Democratic Presidents is relevant. The track records speak for themselves. Reagan's trickle down economic philosophy paid little concern for bringing down the deficit. The belief was that as long as the economy was growing, it wouldn't be a problem. And every Republican president since Reagan has embraced that philosophy - cut taxes for the rich, they'll spend more money, creating jobs and bigger tax base. The problem is, that economic policy has shown to have failed.

Edited September 10, 2009 by Col. 'Bat' Guano

[dalegg 143]

Look, we either give credit or assign Federal fiscal responsibility to presidents or we don't.

We don't. Until a President has the support of congress and uses that support to be responsible its impossible to give him credit.

You can blame Reagan if you want, but he didn't have the full congress he wanted so obviously in order to get his tax cuts and military spending passed, he had to agree to Democrats wishes.

You can give credit to Clinton if you want, but he didn't have the congress he wanted either, so how do we know what he would have done if his cast of 1993 remained until 2000?

You can blame Bush all you want for his deficits.

Didn't we basically have the same tax code in Clinton's term that was created under Reagan? So how can you claim Reagan's policies failed? It almost eventually resulted in a reduction of the national debt with relatively low taxes.