Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
If we listened to the candidates talk, then Bush would be a small-government conservative who would restore fiscal responsibility while cutting taxes and maintaining compassion to everyone in need, while Kerry would be a big, but not too big, government non-liberal who would avoid raising taxes on too many people while expanding government programs that are necessary and bringing back the surplus.
In other words, I think GGG (or whoever you responded to -- I forgot by now) was suggesting that you look past the talk to the record, by contrasting the records of the Clinton presidency and the Bush (and Reagan?) presidencies for fiscal prudence. It's this record that leads to the conclusion that only the Dems can claim fiscal responsibility over the past 25 years. And no, don't respond by saying "the bubble economy was what killed the deficit," because the bubble of the late 80s sure didn't do that. Clinton killed the deficit through a combination of luck, tax increases, and not spending beyond the government's means.
Kerry cannot conceivably do everything he's promised from a fiscal perspective. Nor can Bush. This is one of the many very sad things about American politics, and the electorate's refusal to accept fiscal reality.
|
How can you make this claim when the DEMs controlled Congress for roughly 15 of those 25 years? You can't. The fact is that both parties are out of control on spending, which I can't see stopping as long as the country is so divided, unless there is another extraordinary event, like the Contract.
