Thursday, October 05, 2006

 

Politicians...Gotta Love 'em

Foley

Black

Comments:
Power corrupts...
 
I believe the American people are more and more angry with politicians in both parties.

We need a leader to emerge who's like Ronald Reagan. I'm hearing about a guy in Iowa who's already running a campaign for the GOP nomination.

John Cox even got a big write-up in the Los Angeles Times and the gist is that he's overcoming his lack of name recognition while appearing to truly be a Beltway outsider.

I checked his new TV spots on his website: www.cox2008.com/video
 
I agree, NCGOP. Reagan was an idealist, but still a very practical man. When his ERTA'81 tax cuts unleashed a flood of fiscal red ink, he had the good sense to stem the tide by signing two major increases into law (TEFRA'82 and DEFRA'84).

TEFRA'82, I would point out, was also a larger tax increase (in real dollars and as a % of GDP) than OBRA'93 that was passed under Clinton.

Reagan also talked tough on foreign policy, but he knew when it was time to diplomatically engage other nations. The INF Treaty is wonderful evidence of this.

Reagan's true interest was promoting national welfare, not blindly following ideology. Today's Republican politicans would do well to learn from Reagan's example. Wouldn't you agree? :)
 
Student,

This is twice you've praised tax increases. Couldn't Reagan have also "stemmed the tide" by cutting spending? Do you decry deficits or just tax cuts? I can't figure it out.
 
Well, Reagan could have, but he didn't. So it strikes me as odd that so many Reagan-admirers only remember him as a tax cutter and not a tax hiker (not necc NCGOP). The goal of my previous post was to delicately illustrate Reagan’s odd contradictions. As a government employee that sympathizes with anarchist arguments, I’m sure you can appreciate contradiction. :)

As for my own views, I believe that continuous structural deficits can lead to some very unpleasant consequences, so we would be wise to avoid them. The level of taxation the public bears should be a function of the size of government they wish to support. If one wants to cut spending, then just cut spending. “Starve the beast” approaches to cutting spending have proven to be ineffective and rest on a basic distrust of the American people to choose what size of government they want.
 
"As a government employee that sympathizes with anarchist arguments, I’m sure you can appreciate contradiction."

My job is fungible; there is no contradiction here.
 
Okay. :)
 
Post a Comment



<< Home
CrispAds Blog Ads

Does someone you know deserve flowers?
Web Site Hit Counter
Dell Canada

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?