Say Anything Blog

So, if we’re to believe what’s written here, Dorgan’s book is all about politics not actual economics. What Dorgan is suggesting is not necessarily good policy, but it sure will make him look like a nice guy to voters.

Which is about par for the course with liberals these days

Its about par for the course George ‘Guns-n-Butter‘ Bush has been taking the Republican party too. He has been alligning the Republican party with the Deep South (Religious/Socially conservative, but for big government populism) at the expence of us conservative from the Northeast, West Coast and Rockies (Socially moderate/libertarian fiscal conservative, pro small government).

Hence why the minumum wage bill passed the house with OVERWHELMING Republican support(~210 Yay and only 21-Nays, even most Dems voted against. And I doubt Bush will veto it. Its a sad day when Democrats are actually more consistent against this bill than Republicans

Hence all the Abramoff Republican crooks selling their votes to the lobbyiest willing to pay the most.

..the rampant chronyism/incompetance at DHS and at HUD

..the pathetic effort at Medicare Reform, the Medicare Prescription Drug, “Improvement”, and “Modernization” Act

All the damn pork spending which has about more than double with ‘Guns-n-Butter’ Bush in power. (Heritage Foundation study)

...all the curruption in Republican controlled states (i.e Kentucky and Ohio)

One thing I actually liked about Bush was the Tax Reform, and even that he couldn’t do without screwing someone

“You’re an easy target, quite frankly. You don’t have lobbyists here, you don’t have any big law firms to protect your interests,” Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, told an audience of expatriates at an event Wednesday evening. “It’s not your fault, but that’s the way it is.”

I’m a Club for Growth fiscal conservative and one that is very dissapointed with Bush.

unfortunately, under him people like FreeRepublicans are the norm, not the exception, of the party now.  That’s the direction the party is going under Bush. Bush is alligning it with the Deep South at the expense of fiscal conservative like me.

This is the main reason I’m pissed at Bush and currently disgusted by today’s Republican party
It is not the Reagan/Gingrich party that is used to be.

aNON: Do you know what “Guns and Butter” actually means?  Apparently not.
It’s always easy to snipe, but give us some constructive plans that you have for how the Party should go, rather than just complaining about the guy in the hot seat.
While it’s true that real Conservatives(socially, fiscally and politically conservative, no “Libertarians” need apply) don’t like some of what the President has done while attempting to govern all the people in this country, name one Dem you would like to see in major public office, and why.

WHY should I name one Dem?

..its the Republican party we are trying to reform here--get it back to the good’ole Reagan and Newt Gingrich days

aNON: Just thought I would ask.  A lot of complainers are really trying to gin up votes for the Dems.  Wondered if you were one of them.
BTW, “Guns and Butter” is a way of distinguishing our economic system from those which must choose between guns and butter.  We generate enough prosperity to have both.  It has nothing to do with any particular President, as it is an aspect of our demand economic system.  You seemed to think it was a smear or some sort of criticism or other, when it is a compliment to our system.  Thought you might like to know…

BTW: “Guns” represents military spending, and “Butter” represents domestic consumer spending(you know, that stuff that makes life worth living?)

I guess you are right, but I meant it as a comparison to the policies of LBJ during the Vietnam War.

aNON: LBJ also advocated guns and butter.  The last time we really sacrificed was during WWII, and that was made necessary by the socialist stagnation called the New Deal, which prevented a typical free enterprise recovery from the Crash of ‘29.

Went to your link, and although I find Wiki way too leftie in most cases, that entry was mostly accurate, to my understanding.  Its inaccuracies were not major.

In fact, it’s what distinguishes the expanding productivity of a demand system with the inevitable stagnation and shortages of a command economy.  Therefore, it is not an instrument of foreign policy at all, but a reality of the structure of the economic system chosen.

Unemployment at 4.6%????

I need read no more.

The writer should explore deeper into the unemployment rate.  The figure quoted, probably from government sources, is based on the number of people applying for unemployment benefits.  It doesn’t include those whose benefits have expired and those who are not eligible for benefits.

Additionally, it doesn’t define ‘employment’.  The government likes to tell us how many new jobs are created but it doesn’t tell us that the majority--vast majority--of those new jobs are flipping hamburgers at minimum wage.  What the writer should focus on is not the unemployment rate itself but the people who are losing their jobs to people overseas and to illegal immigrants.

Baloney leduc.  You guys just can’t stand it that the American people are better off under Republicans.