This is a response to a blog by Kimba, a friendly political adversary. I wish nothing but the best for him and his family, which includes the rejection of “Keynesian economic theories.”
I agree! Bush has increased the size of the government. This is a no-no for a conservative of my stripe. Are you saying you want to shrink the government? Do you think this is what the Democrats stand for?
Bush’s tax cuts and corporate excise tax cuts have created record returns. The less people have to pay the more they put into the economy and the more the economy grows… which increases the tax base.
Bush is a neo-con, his ideology lives more so in the Democratic Party than mine, at least historically. Do you remember a post I did on what a neo-con is? I quoted The Neocon Reader as saying:
“…Although neocons are proud to have broken in many ways with the post-Cold War consensus, they can reasonably claim that their ideas have deep roots in early American and British history, and in policies advocated by American presidencies such as John Quincy Adams and Theodore Roosevelt, and by British prime ministers Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair. As such, and because of the quality of the neoconservatives’ research and advocacy, their fundamental ideas are likely to survive changes of control of the White House.
“So, too, with domestic policy. The programs advocated by neoconservatives in the fields of crime, welfare reform, and what has been called ‘the culture war’ did not spring fully formed from the minds of those who helped George W. Bush to fashion ‘compassionate conservatism.’ Instead, these ideas originated with Victorian reformers, were then buried under the mass of legislation that constitutes the New Deal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and by President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, to re-emerge in the articles, pamphlets, and proposals of the neocons. In the area of domestic policy the ‘neo’ prefix may turn out to be as potentially misleading as it can be in the foreign policy field (or at least too all-encompassing to describe what neo-conservatism is about.
“But we must begin our discussion of the development of neoconservatism with a disclaimer. As David Brooks notes in an essay included in this volume, ‘If you ever read a sentence that starts with “Neocons believe”, there is a 99.44 per cent chance everything else in that sentence will be untrue’.”
Basically all the people you lash out at on this blog are self-admitted “New Deal” people. Is your party going to keep the tax cuts where they are or raise them? Your main runners for the Democrats are wanting to put a tax on oil companies. Question is:
“will this raise or lower the price of gas?”
When your party puts the clamps on the 27-percentile, they contribute less to 401k plans in matching funds for the companies they own. How does that help the common man? They raise the price of the goods they make to absorb the increased tax-burden. How does this help the common man? When Bush cut the corporate tax, less corporations moved overseas. Outsourcing declined. This helped the common man. You should consider what will allow for the economy (which is in overdrive right now – even with all the problems worldwide).
You are not considering the deficit to GDP margin either, which is a sure sign of your political bias. This bias covers up an important fact… that is:
I will post another link to an article that cuts through your myths that somehow the Democratic Party helps the little guy.
22 consecutive quarters of economic growth and expansion, 8-million jobs and surging tax revenues that outpaced projections by 300-billion. But the Democrats have attached the anchor to this growth, which will do nothing but hurt our economy (NRO article.) In this same article – just mentioned – we find the “pay-as-you-go” crowd exposed.
This is why Larry Kudlow’s article in January rubs in the face of naysayer’s like Lou Dobbs are, and will continue to be wrong:
UPDATE: COLLEGE GRADS HAVE BRIGHT FUTURE