Forbes: Bush Priorities Will Swell Deficit --->>>

[Stephanie]

http://www.forbes.com/economy/2006/01/09/us-deficit-politics-cx_0110oxford_bush.html?partner=rss

Bush Priorities Will Swell Deficit
Oxford Analytica, 01.10.06, 6:00 AM ET

President George W. Bush on Jan. 7 pressed Congress to extend tax cuts on dividends and capital gains, but ruled out major reductions in entitlement programs. The growth of the federal budget and accompanying deficits are straining Republican Party unity and undermining the Administration's ability to respond to emergency needs, such as disaster relief.

Bush took office eager to lead a revolution in public policy. He broke from the fiscally prudent approach that characterized the presidencies of both his father and Bill Clinton. Instead, he boldly challenged the basic tenets of decades of foreign, economic and domestic policy. The federal government's outlays have increased by more than 25% since he took office, adding approximately $1.7 trillion to the national debt.

There are three complementary explanations for this abandonment of fiscal restraint, namely:

--the growth of 'big government' conservatism

--a belief in tax cuts as the cornerstone of domestic policy

--new demands for spending on the war on terrorism and homeland security

<more>

[Straight Shooter]

1. *cough* Isn't 'big government" conservatism an oxymoron? n/t

[fasttense]

3. Yeah like deficit spending conservatism.

The repukes don't even follow their own philosophy.

[iam]

13. Wrong again!

conservatism dictates that power shall be concentrated in as few hands as possible. If that takes massive debt, thats what will happen. In this case, conservatives are concentrating power by trying to destroy the ability of our govt to buy food for the poor by sending that money to the wealthy. Pure evil.

[iam]

12. Wrong! Stop defending conservatism!

The size of the govt has nothing to do with conservatism, it's what govt does that defines whether it's conservative or Liberal. If the govt is used to destroy Liberty, it's conservative, if the the govt is used to defend and expand Liberty it is a Liberal govt (by definition).

[Straight Shooter]

14. Not defending anything. That's why the use of *cough* .... n/t

[Inland]

2. Now, does Forbes charge for this sort of timely analysis?

Welcome to 2006.

[roguevalley]

4. I hear China is quitting dollars and buying yen and Euros. Kiss our

asses goodbye.

[TheFarseer]

6. even more frightening

Iran is planning to quit dollars and buy euros

[frylock]

9. iraq was going to do the same..

and that is why we are really over there.

[pinerow]

5. Those folks at Forbes have a firm grip on the obvious...

sheesh...

[joefree1]

7. Uh oh, Bush has lost the support of Forbes

Steve Forbes, the owner of Forbes, is a major right wing wacko. If he is slamming Bush us poor folk are in deep doo doo.

[Hobarticus]

8. Forbes' LBN: sun will set today, plans to return tomorrow

Where the hell is the DUHHHHHHH emoticon?

[pinerow]

10. We need a "sheesh" emoticon also...

ya hear that software guys...lol

[OKthatsIT]

11. Bush trashed Texas. Forbes knew it would happen to the US

Forbes is just another greedy company who waited until the rich realized Bush was going to 'wiretap' anyone it damn well pleased. Bush can also access anyone's financial records, so he claims. Since Bush is hell bent on finding 'the dirt' on everyone, we can assume 'blackmail' is his motive...and Alito will permit Bush to continue as usual.

[applegrove]

15. All they care about in bankrupting the government so a generation

grows up seeing governance as crap - like in the poor countries - so people will vote for corporations rather that the common good!

[corporate_mike]

16. National Debt --> $8,160,257,013,544.35

link: http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm

[m0nkeyneck]

17. buy gold

[Orsino]

18. "Will" swell the deficit?

Were fated to, did, are and will.

The only Bush priority is transferring the budget surplus to CEOs, as quickly and as bloodily as possible.

[sakabatou]

19. Is there a chart anywhere than has the current financial data

along with starting from 1975?