Numbers Don't Lie About Bush

[Pikachu]

Text-O-Rama!

 

[Harvey]

Buckley's a tired, inane old gasbag. I have trouble understanding him even when he's in a Q&A with real human beings, trying to explain whatever he's blabbing about. WTF did he say?

BTW -- <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=chewing_the_figure
&ns=WilliamFBuckley&dt=07/29/2006&page=full">Here's a better link</a>.

 

[Pikachu]

I couldn't find the article there, but it will appear here tomorrow. After re-reading his columns a few times, I can finally make sense of them. No idea why he has to use obscure, 7 syllable words all the time, but I generally agree with him in the end.

This article didn't need to be interpreted, because he didn't say much. Well, he didn't say much, but the numbers speak volumes!

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: Harvey
Buckley's a tired, inane old gasbag. I have trouble understanding him even when he's in a Q&A with real human beings. trying to explain whatever he's blabbing about. WTF did he say?

BTW -- [Here's a better link]http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=chewing_the_figure
&ns=WilliamFBuckley&dt=07/29/2006&page=full[/l].

I have to agree, I could not make much sense of it. He was all over the place. I got to the end and was trying to think of the point he was making.

 

[Pikachu]

This particular article ain't that difficult!

• Budget has grown exponentially
• Facts cited by Richard Wolf
• Facts cited by Carl Rove
• Summarized voters must decide if fruit of those numbers was good or bad.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Cliff Notes . . . I'm an experienced Buckley reader . . . I had a lot of practice during my wayward days as a young Republican.

1) Bush is the worst manager of fiscal policy (spending side) since LBJ.

2) According to Rove, Bush policies (tax cuts) rescued the economy leading to higher growth and higher federal revenue.

3) According to Rove, tax cuts for the wealthy increased the federal tax burden of the wealthy.

4) According to Rove, if revenue rises sufficiently through 2006 then federal taxes will exceed the historical average.

5) According to Rove, reduced trade barriers abroad are good for the US economy.

6) According to Rove, nonsecurity discretionary spending has decreased every year of the Bush Regime.

7) Since Americans can't read or count . . . the team that lies best will win.

Now fact-check:
1) True . . .
2) Bush policies may have contributed to the recovery. Unfortunately, the recovery was one of the worst this century.
3) A lot of 'truthiness' in this one. The wealthy got tax cuts and paid more in taxes b/c they were the ones that saw sizeable income gains in the past six years.
4) It may be true. Unfortunately, the inclusive budget deficit will still be FAR larger than the historical average.
5) True. But failed to mention that US trade policies are just as distorted as our friends and foes abroad . . . sugar anyone.
6) Almost certainly a lie.
7) We will see.

 

[Pikachu]

People vote their pocketbooks... this is what the article is about. Democrats will woo voters with more entitlements. There's a shock! :roll:

With any luck, the economy will be the deciding factor.

 

[kage69]

I usually avoid Buckley articles, but that one wasn't too bad. His weird method of commentary aside, those are some damning numbers. Rove is FOS, but we all know that already.

 

[zephyrprime]

Buckley is actually implying that Rove is a big spin meister, the bush is a big spender, and the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. I don't know why he leaves it up to the reader to "reconcile" when he could just come out and say it. Subtlety is lost on the reading public.

 

[Pikachu]

the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer.

Oh, I forgot. More entitlements AND class warfare. The FACT that lowering taxes DID increase revenue, and the FACT that the top 3% DO pay more taxes than the other 97% combined is spin. :roll:

I hate the massive discretionary spending as much as, or more than anybody, but I'll also give the devil his due.

 

[Zebo]

Bush is not and never has been a conservative. He is a liberal on race issues (open borders, loves AA), nationalism, and Wilsonian and foreign policy. The whole family is the same way and always has been from Prescott to George the III out in Florida.

I really can't fiqure out why liberals hate him so.