RateItAll: The Opinion Network

Gee, I think this ecomony is going great. . .(Sarcasm) read the business section people, check out the numbers. The 90's rocked financially and things have been in the toilet since this Texas asshole stole the election. Financially speaking, we can't afford 4 more years of this retard.

such as war

The puzzling thing about republicans is that they consistantly approve of a man that goes directly against their principle of fiscal conservativity. This guy has not vetoed a single spending bill since he came into office!

A HUGE budget deficit! Bush ran his company into the ground and now he is doing the same thing to the country. He and his buddies will come out of it even richer than before.

America has gone from a record surplus to a record deficit.

Permit me to define the intiation, or perhaps escalation would be a better word, of reckless government spending. Since Bush assumed office, overall spending is up 16%, and non-defense spending is up 21%. 55% of these spending increases have nothing to do with national defense OR homeland security. Federal spending on education has increased 65% under Bush, thereby increasing the federal government's control of the education system, a job that should be largely left to the states and local districts. Bush has signed a six year, $250 Billion farm bill, completely erasing the Freedom to Farm Act of 1996 by expanding agricultural subsidy programs. Furthermore, Bush has signed a $72.5 Billion Energy Bill with nearly $25B of it going to large energy corporations in the from of subsidies. Bush has approved a massive expansion of Medicare, $400B over the next ten years. I'm sorry folks, but the President HAS INITIATED unprecedented high government spending. Spending in 2000 was at $1.8 Trillion; in 2004 it is set to approach $2.5T. Furthermore, Bush has refused to stand up to Congress, not vetoing ONE spending bill since he assumed office, not one. Many like to compare Bush to Reagan, but there IS no comparison. Reagan cut taxes while keeping a hold on federal spending (discretionary); Bush, the compassionate conservative has cut taxes while personally approving of massive spending bills and entitlement programs. Now, we can argue all day about the need for the certain programs that Bush has approved spending increases for, but the point is, you cannot cut taxes and approve massive spending increases at the same time. Bush truly is trying to be all things to all people, and it's driving this country down a perilous fiscal course. John McCain is right--- Bush AND the Congress truly are spending money like a drunken sailor.

I recently had a debate with Redoedo on this subject, I think how it turned out was that I was arguing for necessity of Roosevelts New Deal rather then the efficacy of deficit spending in itself. Let me explain my thoughts on this one. Left-wingers tend to raise taxes to pay for discretionary public and social programs. Right-wingers or fiscal conservatives tend to cut spending on these social programs so they can afford to cut taxes. Right now Bush is spending enough for two governments. Assuming the supply side miracle will not only compensate for the lost revenue from huge tax cuts (and more to come), the vast defense spending, the huge increase in public spending AND the rapidly rising debt is a little optimistic, don'tcha think?

OK, I am not totally positive on this, but I don't think REDOEDO is stating his opinions at all on any of his BUSH lists titles (it is merely a title, not his opinion), he is wording them like this too see what people's opinions are too the comments...I am sure if REDOEDO has an opinion on it he will leave it in a review on his list...think before accusing redoedo of anything...and even if they are opinions, he certainly has the right to them. And as for this particular review...I totally agree Bush is recklessly spending money...there are so many examples that I don't feel like taking the time...good grief !!!

Redoedo is usually a formidably clear thinker. I'm surprised someone with his good sense would imply that Bush initiated all this spending. I've been around for a long time, and trust me, George Bush didn't start this mess. I agree that government spending is disgusting and out of control...but it's been that way as far back as I can remember. (since the question has to do with resons not to vote for George in '04, would someone supply us with the name of a Democrat who will REDUCE spending? If you can, I'll RACE you to the voting booth and vote for your Democrat).

Saying the initiation of wreckless government spending is the opinion of the person who made this list. Why don't you define initiation of wreckless government spending? I'm sure many would disagree with your definition.

What's up with this? I have yet to get a straight answer from my libertarian or Republican friends on how to justify Bush's insane spending. In my mind, he is trying to buy votes by approving every spending bill that comes across his desk (Medicare, Energy, etc.). This kind of behavior can only be described as populist (or left wing). When you combine his spending habits with his protectionist trade policies, Bush is displaying some serious socialist tendencies.

I believe a balanced budget should be mandatory. Bizarrely, I find myself being more conservative than the president and congress at the present time. The deficit is a national disgrace.

I thought republicans were supposed to be fiscally conservative.