Libertarians lambast Bush for funding war with defecit spending

[Phokus]

Our favorite Communist/Fascist/Warmongering President, Bush, is at it again!

Libertarian Party Press Releases

March 26, 2003

Libertarians lambaste Bush for funding war with deficit spending

WASHINGTON, DC -- By funding the war with deficit spending rather than program cuts, President Bush is piling one outrage on top of another, Libertarians say.

"If this war is as important as the president claims, why isn't he asking for a sacrifice from the government as well as from the people?" asked Geoffrey Neale, national chairman of the Libertarian Party. "If there's one thing worse than an unnecessary war, it's funding that war with borrowed money."

The deficit will increase dramatically if Congress approves the $74.7 billion supplemental spending bill that Bush requested on Tuesday to fight the war in Iraq for the next several months. The supplemental spending would be added to the record $2.23 trillion budget planned for fiscal 2003.

Bush's request has Libertarians asking: If U.S. troops can sacrifice their lives for the war effort, can't Democrats and Republicans sacrifice a few of their favorite government programs?

"Bush's request of $75 billion represents just one-thirtieth of the overall federal budget," Neale said. "Since there are literally thousands of wasteful, unnecessary federal programs, cutting one out of every 30 should be easy."

One example is corporate welfare.

"A study by Time magazine in 1998 estimated that corporate welfare costs U.S. taxpayers $125 billion annually -- nearly twice as much as Bush is requesting for the war," Neale said. "Does the president believe that funneling money to these corporate fat cats is more important than supporting U.S. troops in Iraq? If not, why doesn?t he propose shutting off that spigot of special interest money?"

Dozens of other wasteful, unnecessary programs could be ended as well, he said.

"Last year farm subsidies ate up $35 billion, or about half of what Bush is requesting for the war," Neale said. "This year Congress will spend $10 billion for anti-AIDS programs in Africa. It will squander $100 million on the National Endowment for the Arts, embark on a $400 billion program to prop up Medicare, and fund countless pork barrel projects. Can't any of these programs be cut in a time of national crisis?"

Even a small, symbolic sacrifice, such as asking Congress to give back the $5,000 pay raise that it accepted earlier this year, might indicate that politicians are trying to do their part, Neale suggested.

"In a time of national crisis, patriotism requires that politicians put the national interest above their own self-interest," Neale said. "One way they can do that is by resisting the temptation to go on yet another borrowing binge.

"Especially with U.S. troops being captured and killed in Iraq, it's time to expect a little sacrifice in Washington, DC."

http://www.lp.org/press/archive.php?function=view&record=635

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Our favorite Communist/Fascist/Warmongering President, Bush, is at it again!

Libertarian Party Press Releases

March 26, 2003

Libertarians lambaste Bush for funding war with deficit spending

WASHINGTON, DC -- By funding the war with deficit spending rather than program cuts, President Bush is piling one outrage on top of another, Libertarians say.

"If this war is as important as the president claims, why isn't he asking for a sacrifice from the government as well as from the people?" asked Geoffrey Neale, national chairman of the Libertarian Party. "If there's one thing worse than an unnecessary war, it's funding that war with borrowed money."

The deficit will increase dramatically if Congress approves the $74.7 billion supplemental spending bill that Bush requested on Tuesday to fight the war in Iraq for the next several months. The supplemental spending would be added to the record $2.23 trillion budget planned for fiscal 2003.

Bush's request has Libertarians asking: If U.S. troops can sacrifice their lives for the war effort, can't Democrats and Republicans sacrifice a few of their favorite government programs?

"Bush's request of $75 billion represents just one-thirtieth of the overall federal budget," Neale said. "Since there are literally thousands of wasteful, unnecessary federal programs, cutting one out of every 30 should be easy."

One example is corporate welfare.

"A study by Time magazine in 1998 estimated that corporate welfare costs U.S. taxpayers $125 billion annually -- nearly twice as much as Bush is requesting for the war," Neale said. "Does the president believe that funneling money to these corporate fat cats is more important than supporting U.S. troops in Iraq? If not, why doesn?t he propose shutting off that spigot of special interest money?"

Dozens of other wasteful, unnecessary programs could be ended as well, he said.

"Last year farm subsidies ate up $35 billion, or about half of what Bush is requesting for the war," Neale said. "This year Congress will spend $10 billion for anti-AIDS programs in Africa. It will squander $100 million on the National Endowment for the Arts, embark on a $400 billion program to prop up Medicare, and fund countless pork barrel projects. Can't any of these programs be cut in a time of national crisis?"

Even a small, symbolic sacrifice, such as asking Congress to give back the $5,000 pay raise that it accepted earlier this year, might indicate that politicians are trying to do their part, Neale suggested.

"In a time of national crisis, patriotism requires that politicians put the national interest above their own self-interest," Neale said. "One way they can do that is by resisting the temptation to go on yet another borrowing binge.

"Especially with U.S. troops being captured and killed in Iraq, it's time to expect a little sacrifice in Washington, DC."

http://www.lp.org/press/archive.php?function=view&record=635

The sad part is, even if Bush presented a balanced budget, congress would not pass it.

 

[drewshin]

how many libertarians are there in the u.s.? i've never met one.

 

[Tripleshot]

The sad part is, even if Bush presented a balanced budget, congress would not pass it.


Are you kidding? Its a republican House and senate. Its the trifecta! Don't you know that republicans are the party of fiscal responsibilty?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot
The sad part is, even if Bush presented a balanced budget, congress would not pass it.


Are you kidding? Its a republican House and senate. Its the trifecta! Don't you know that republicans are the party of fiscal responsibilty?

You forget right now, it takes 60 vote sto break a filibuster. Democrats screamed about the minor cuts that went into this years budget. But yes, I would much rather see spending cut.

 

[Ferocious]

Damn I wish McCain would have won.

But he would not have been a good corporate puppet....so he really never stood a chance of beating Bush.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Our favorite Communist/Fascist/Warmongering President, Bush, is at it again!

Yeah, because commies are all about tax cuts

 

[KenGr]

Originally posted by: drewshin
how many libertarians are there in the u.s.? i've never met one.

From the Libertarian party web site (www.lp.org):


Currently, more than 300 Libertarians hold elective office, more than twice as many as all other third parties combined. The Libertarian Party ran more than 1430 candidates in the 2000 elections, more than twice as many as all other third parties combined.

We fielded candidates for 255 of the 435 seats in the U.S House as well as 25 of the 33 Senate seats up for election -- the first time in eighty years that any third party has contested a majority of the seats in Congress. Our slate of U.S. House candidates received 1.7 million votes, the first time any third party has received over a million votes for U.S. House.



There are lots of Libertarians, they just don't tend to get in peoples faces like some of the other "third parties".

 

[xsiled]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Our favorite Communist/Fascist Chancellor Schröder/President Chirac, is at it again!

agreed




you give hard working supportive conservitive libertarians a bad name.

join the f*****g green party a******

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot
The sad part is, even if Bush presented a balanced budget, congress would not pass it.


Are you kidding? Its a republican House and senate. Its the trifecta! Don't you know that republicans are the party of fiscal responsibilty?

LOL

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Phokus
Our favorite Communist/Fascist/Warmongering President, Bush, is at it again!

Yeah, because commies are all about tax cuts

a) The tax cuts were pathetic. Their only purpose was to get votes from braindead conservatives just like yourself

b) Bush has increased the size of government astronomically more than anyone else i can remember. Even more than Reagan for God's sakes.

c) And as usual, once the defecit reaches a boiling point, we will once again have to raise taxes (does this remind anyone of a certain other 'conservative' president we once had?!) to fix the budget.

 

[JellyBaby]

Wartime is a great time to ask Congress to spend more of the people's money. If they refuse they're un-American.

With this Congress I half expect them to pass a "resolution" empowering the President to take as much money from the federal till as he thinks is necessary.

 

[HillbillyHab]

Originally posted by: drewshin
how many libertarians are there in the u.s.? i've never met one.

At least one. Pleased to virtually meet you drewshin.