Comments on: Tax Tea Party Fantasy

By: Did he come to bury or praise Suppy-Side Economics? « Sky Dancing in a Man’s World

Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:40:47 +0000

[...] wisdom. Also worth a read are two Bartlett’s pieces from the blog new majority. The first is Tax Tea Party Fantasy from last spring and Why I Am Anti-Republican from late this summer. It seems old dogs do [...]

By: Did he come to bury or praise Suppy-Side Economics? « The Confluence

Did he come to bury or praise Suppy-Side Economics? « The Confluence — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:37:13 +0000

[...] Also worth a read are two Bartlett’s pieces from the blog new majority. The first is Tax Tea Party Fantasy from last spring and Why I Am Anti-Republican from late this summer. It seems Old dogs do [...]

By: Funny: I’ll believe that Bruce Barlett is serious about helping the GOP recover… - Moe_Lane’s blog - RedState

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:09:54 +0000

[...] Sure, you can join next year, Bartlett. Just don’t expect to be given a task more involved than “make a [...]

By: Moe Lane » Funny: I’ll believe that Bruce Barlett is serious about helping the GOP recover…

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 13:51:41 +0000

[...] Sure, you can join the Tea Parties next year, Bartlett. Just don’t expect to be given a task more involved than [...]

By: dalukas

dalukas — Fri, 01 May 2009 07:06:01 +0000

This is an Interesting article. I did attend the Tea Party here in Little Rock to check it out. The author obviously did not attend one. The tea party rallies werent as much about over-taxation, as they were about the out of control spending our federal government is engaging in. I am sure there were many different political views at the Little Rock Tea Party Rally. One thing is for sure, the people there were fed up with the bail outs and the huge deficit spending in Washington.

I do agree with the article regarding the silence of conservatives, when G. W. Bush was massively expanding the role of the Federal Government. How hypocritical. I guess that was the New Tone that Bush campaigned on.

However, Obama appears that he will Trump even G.W. With a 3.55 Trillion dollar proposed 2010 budget. Our tax revenue is approximately half that. Just to fund our federal budget the U.S. is borrowing at a cost of around 900 billion in interest payments in 2010 alone. Most of the money is being borrowed from Communist China, who buys a large portion of our Treasuries.

I fear that history will repeat itself. Yes the last CPE numbers that were released were tame inflation numbers; however, Mark my words, when the economy does turn around and we have some positive GDP growth, it is inevitable that we will see hyper-inflation. I fear this will lead to a return to double-digit interest rates and out of control inflation. Inflation is the arch-enemy of fixed-income investments. This will drive yields up, just to keep up with the pace of inflation.

Our Federal Government simply cant continue to spend trillions more than it collections in taxes without it having a long-term negative effect. We have something like 70 Trillion Dollars in unfunded liabilities (Federal Programs like Social Security, etc. etc. ). There are really only three ways to fund the Federal Governments activities: 1. Raise Taxes 2. Continue to borrow and pay billions in interest payments to countries like China, or just print money . All of the aforementioned is happening now and it will continue to have a negative impact on our economy.

What they really need to be doing in Washington is cutting spending. Imagine that, spending less than you make. What a novel Ideal. I did find this a little comical: President Obama presented his fiscal year 2010 budget (i.e., the 12 months from 10/01/09 to 9/30/10) on 2/26/09. The budget projects that government spending will be $3.55 trillion, equal to $9.7 billion a day or $100 million every 15 minutes. At his 1st Cabinet meeting, the president asked his 21-member staff to identify $100 million in budget cuts (i.e., in total, not per Cabinet member) over the next 3 months (source: White House, AP). I guess thats a start, 100 million. (Remember, 100 million is spent every 15 minutes by our federal gov.). Possibly they can start by looking at the $200,000.00 allocated in the 2010 budget for a tattoo removal program in CA.
Just because someone now regrets their tattoo doesnt mean the tax payer shouldnt chip and pay for the removal of that outdated body art, right? I am only kidding of course. The tattoo removal program along with thousands of similar programs should be cut.

I believe it was the former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher who said, the only problem with Socialisim is the Goverment keeps running out of other peoples money. Well Said Maggie.............

By: barker13

barker13 — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:47:24 +0000

Bruce Bartlett originally wrote:

"Back in 1977, while a staffer for Congressman Jack Kemp..."

Yeah. I met Kemp. Once. Back in '96, before Dole put him on his ticket.

Again... real life is often a disappointment.

At the time I was working as a driver for Boston Coach, the livery arm of Fidelity Investments.

Anyway... I was assigned to pick up Kemp at a midtown Manhattan hotel and take him to LGA. I was very excited. Kemp was one of my political icons.

Well... not after that ride.

First of all Kemp's staff had apparently double-booked so I was greeted by the sight of Kemp having to pay one driver for a ride that wasn't going to take place...

(Oh, yeah... he was abusing his staffer over that one...)

So much for fiscal conservatism, huh - even fiscal competence. Oh, well... stuff happens. (*SHRUG*)

Well, back to Kemp and his staffer...

Kemp's staffer rode with us. God... to this day I wish I hadn't witnessed this! It was like a scene out of "Spin City." Seriously... Kemp came across as a guy who was all facade whom I doubted could wipe his nose without help from staff.

(In a way it made sense though... I'm guessing coddled jock - football star all through school and then a stint in the pros - then on to coddled congressman and coddled national political figure.) (*SHRUG*)

Kemp also came across as a fairly nasty, self-absorbed kind of guy. (Hey... it was only a 20-minute ride... he was either talking with his staffer or on the phone... but it was enough "contact" to gain an impression.)

Me? To Kemp I wasn't even there except when he literally barked at me to "watch out, man" when some bike messenger almost got himself run over while "jaybiking" in front of us.

Anyway... just a brief anecdote.

BILL

By: barker13

barker13 — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 09:20:44 +0000

Re: Bartlettb; 6:17 PM --

"Barker13, you must have been screaming for vetoes with the teeniest, tinest voice--typical of Johnny-come-lately deficit hawks who claim, with no evidence, that they were opposed to Bush's deficits as well as Obama's."

So... let me get this straight... because I'm just a regular citizen and not a well known politician or columnist my word is suspect?

I mean... you're actually calling me a liar.

Not only are you lashing out with the name calling - first attacking Vadum as "a nitwit," but now you refer to me as a "Johnny come lately" (with absolutely no evidence to back up such a claim) and then proceed to call me a liar.

Now as my fellow "regular" posters know, I'm all for freedom of speech and find it extremely distasteful and frankly creepy that the managing editor of this site, Meghashyam Mali, makes it a habit to remove posts at random leaving "blanks" in the conversation, but if there was ever a poster whose obnoxious and intemperate writings warranted a public rap on the knuckles... it's you, Mr. Bartlett.

You ask "Did you organize any tea parties against Bush's deficit?"

No. Though, again, as regular posters/readers who read my posts may recall, I was so fed up with the RINO Congress and Bush after five years of unprincipled incompetence that I actually left the GOP in early 2006 and re-registered as a Democrat to protest what I considered "betrayal" by the GOP.

What... you want a political resume? I need to "prove" myself to you....? (*CHUCKLE*) OK. Turned 18 in 1980. Voted for Ronald Reagan. 1984 - student (NU - Boston) volunteer for Reagan/Bush. 1988 - Supported Bush-Quayle. After GHWB broke his "no new taxes" pledge and then allowed the Kurds to be slaughtered post-Gulf-War-One I was active supporting Perot.

(Recall... back in 1992 folks like me also engaged in "Tea Party-like" grass roots citizen rallies and such...)

(BTW, from '92-'94 I became a registered Conservative here in NY but once GHWB was retired and after two years of Clinton I returned to the GOP, re-registering as a Republican in advance of the '94 elections where I strongly supported Newt Gingrich and the Republican Revolution.

From the mid-'90's till 2004 I was an extremely active volunteer with the Orange County NY Republican Committee though not formerly a member... a committeeman. Why? Simply because I treasured my independence and want to retain (and did use on occasion) my freedom to buck the Party when I felt the need and even support non-Republican candidates against RINOs when there was the whiff of corruption and/or sheer non-ideological (money driven, personality driven) cronyism tainting a Republican candidate.

Oh... stepping backwards... back in 1999/2000 I was a Forbes supporter. (Yeah... got the Christmas cards and everything.) (*CHUCKLE*)

Anyway, Bruce, wake up and smell the coffee. While you may disagree with someone, questioning their motivations and basically calling them a liar, fraud, or poser with absolutely no evidence is... pretty lame.

To be perfectly honest... I'm shocked. I'm appalled that a "name" columnist whom I've always respected has turned out to be such a shrill, thin-skinned, obnoxious person in "real life."

Bill (William R. Barker, Harriman, NY)

By: vadum

vadum — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 05:44:08 +0000

Mr. Bartlett, who actually does excellent work, should develop thicker skin and avoid writing op-eds as therapy. This limited government enthusiast stopped cheering for the Bush administration years ago.

By: bartlettb

bartlettb — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:17:41 +0000

Barker13, you must have been screaming for vetoes with the teeniest, tinest voice–typical of Johnny-come-lately deficit hawks who claim, with no evidence, that they were opposed to Bush’s deficits as well as Obama’s. Did you organize any tea parties against Bush’s deficit? No. If you had you would have been the only one there. All the rest of these fair-weather conservatives that were out protesting on April 15 were home on April 15, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008. Why? Because they are partisan Republicans, not deficit hawks. They ONLY care about Democratic deficits; Republucan deficits are okay.

By: barker13

barker13 — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:24:02 +0000

Re: Bartlettb; wrote 12 minutes ago --

"It is true that I supported TARP and would do so again in the same circumstances."

Strike one!

"Financial markets were in free fall..."

Oh, please... I don't even know what that statement means! Financial markets were reflecting the underlying reality of losses. That's what they're supposed to do!

"...and I believe that this legislation helped stabilize the economy..."

Respectfully... based upon what - what besides a crystal ball based announcement that "things would have been worse without TARP." See... the crystal ball works both ways... mine said "long term, things would have been better if TARP had been rejected."

"Chalk one final screw-up to the administration most conservatives worshiped for 8 years."

Now here you've totally lost me.

Bush was never a fiscal conservative. Never. Beyond that, while true conservatives were indeed willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt and their support in his first term, the moment he started losing it in his second term... attempting to appoint his third grade music teacher to the Supreme Court... (something like that, right?)... allowing Hamas to bid on West Coast port security contracts... (again... something like that, right...?)... and especially before the surge when it looked like he had screwed up the Iraq War beyond repair... at that point true conservatives started deserting him in droves. I myself actually left the GOP in early 2006.

(BTW... not blaming "just" Bush; obviously the - literally in some cases - corrupt and/or RINO elements in Congress drove true conservatives off the GOP reservation too - perhaps even more so than Bush.)

"I think they are Johnny-come-lately deficit hawks who said nothing for 8 years..."

I don't know who you're referring to, Bruce, but I was screaming for Bush vetos (which never came) all during Bush's first as well as second term.

I don't know, Bruce... I'm not trying to tag team you, here, but you sure do seem to be creating one strawman after another as well as painting with a pretty broad brush.

Finally... calling Vadum a nitwit was uncalled for. Sarcasm and snark is fine... being abusive - without cause - not so much.

BILL