Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (6821)	12/14/2005 10:13:40 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 542126

So he was quite happy to grow the government through borrowing. It is the way the government has grown in the last several years that is illustriative. It has not been adding new benefits, but only adding spending. independent.org From the massive increases in agricultural subsidies in the farm bill of 2002, to the new Medicare prescription drug entitlement of 2003; from the 47% increase in the defense budget, to the 80% increase in education spending, George W. Bush has demonstrated that “limited government” is not part of his political vocabulary. I guess you could say that education is the exception that proves the rule. So what is different about education? The Bush administration has not spent this money to raise teacher's salaries or promote smaller classes or anything other than new test requirements. At the same time there has been a push to cut property tax and other local funding supports for schools. The net result is no increase in programs, but all of the money has to pass through a central control where the agenda can be set to the administration's liking. The point is, even though spending has grown by massive amounts, it has been done in such a way that it will be cut right back when the money runs out. As Cheney said, "it's their turn" but implicit in the actions is the determination that there will be no other turns. TP

To: JohnM who wrote (6821)	12/14/2005 10:21:22 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542126

The only name I recognize on that list that is publicly in favor of smaller government is, of course, Grover Norquist. And I've never heard him placed among the neoconservatives. Do you have some links on that one? Or an argument? The different people have their different areas of interest and focus. Think of them as department heads. Norquist's ideas get support from all of them just as the Iraq policy gets support from Norquist. They don't do about stepping on each other's lines. On the other hand, I have found a site and author who support your view that Grover is only a hanger-on. rightweb.irc-online.org I'm not convinced, because the ideas of Norquist keep getting put into practice by the rest of the neocons. It is their actions that are worth examining more than their words. TP