Not every economic policy takes 8-10 years to manifest itself fully on the economy. Bush 43 made decisions that turned our economy very quickly and will demonstrate economic benefit for years to come. Economists I’ve read after don’t attribute any such economic benefits to Clinton, and especially not to Carter.

Speaking of my ’short memory,’ here’s what I remember-

Bush 41 lost in ‘92 for 2 reasons:
1) He broke his promise of ‘no new taxes’ to make a deal with the Democrats.
2) Ross Perot.

The $5 trillion surplus was spent on the Clinton recession.

If that is true, and it may be, Bush, therefore, cannot take any credit for the economic conditions in the U.S. under his watch, and whatever the economy is for the next President will be a result of Bush 43’s economic policies, not the then current President.

You may have a short memory, but Bush 41 lost re-election becuase of an economic recession, and in the 2000 election Bush and Gore debated how they were going to spend a $5 trillion surplus.

“Spratt, who would be the Budget Committee chairman if Democrats regain the House, believes in the fiscal policy that created a $236 billion per year surpus by the end of the Clinton Administration in 2000.”

This means that Spratt believes in Reagan’s & Bush 41’s fiscal policy, since they built the booming economy leading into Clinton’s presidency. The Clinton recession began in March 2000 and was inherited by Bush 43.

“If Democrats are back in the majority, we will go back to the policy of surpluses, not deficits.”

Democrats never had a policy that produced surpluses. They inherited a booming economy and reaped its benefits. Meanwhile, they managed to reverse the growth and produce a recession as mentioned above.

Granted, the current GOP leadership is failing with fiscal policy. The Democrats, who cannot seem to understand the economic effects of tax cuts, will fail even worse. Mac Collins will be an agent of change. He is a leader, and he will help turn the GOP in the right direction. He’s the best choice to represent the 8th district.

(1) Democrats have been complicit in the spending and government expansion. They’re not just some “innocent” party that has been taken advantage of. Look at the voting records. Voting records tell you where someone’s loyalties are.

(2) If Mac Collins gets his seat back, he has already been promised his senority within the GOP caucus. Therefore, he will be one of the party leaders. He’ll have a hand in setting fiscal policy, not just “going along” with it.

(3) Regardless of what Spratt “believes” in, I challenge you to look at the voting record. I provided a link. Look at his votes on appropriations. Look at his votes on the Flake Amendments. Look at his votes on tax cuts. Like you said, it’s easy to go on what someone “says”. I prefer to go by what someone does.

Besides, cutting certain taxes is a good way to boost revenue. Look at the Bush tax cuts. It almost pains me to come to GW’s defense, but the Bush tax cuts have created record tax revenues. Spratt will not vote to cut taxes (look at his voting record), I’m convinced of that. He won’t vote to stop spending (look at his voting record), I’m convinced of that. Mac Collins has been tough on spending AND taxing.

I think we’ll never agree on this. But, just so you’ll know that not everyone opposed to a democrat getting elected is reciting Sean Hannity talking points, there it is.

Electing Mac Collins would be akin to enabling these borrow and spend, big government Republican committee chairmen, despite Mac Collins’ possible beliefs to the contrary. Collins will still vote for the GOP leadership and will support these big spending, liberal Republican committee chairmen.

Spratt, who would be the Budget Committee chairman if Democrats regain the House, believes in the fiscal policy that created a $236 billion per year surpus by the end of the Clinton Administration in 2000. He opposes the current big government, liberal, borrow and spend policy that the GOP has set over the past 6 years.

If Democrats are back in the majority, we will go back to the policy of surpluses, not deficits.

If we continue down the path that the big government, free spending, GOP has set, taxes will have to be raised at some point, just to service the debt.

It needs to end right now. And that starts with not election an enabler of these big government, liberal Republican committee chairman – Max Collins.

Dude. You really need to pay attention to my posts. I agree with you 100% on this issue. 100%. Hell, I go even further. I respect the “tax and spend” philosophy of the Democrats more than I respect the “borrow and spend” philosophy of the fiscally liberal Republicans. At least with “tax and spend” you’re paying for it yourself and not passing it on to your kids.

I don’t need to prove to you that I’m right about Spratt. But I will anyway. Go to this website and to the research for yourself:
Voting Record: http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=H3661103
Intrest Group Ratings: http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=H3661103

Sponsoring a balanced budget bill doesn’t make you a “conservative”. Hell, EVERY Congressman should hope to balance to budget. The point is, John Spratt is a free-spending liberal, just like most of the Big-government “borrow-and-spend” Republicans.

Get big spending Republicans, and their committee chairmen, out of office.

I’ll go further than that. I say get ALL big spenders Republicans and Democrats out of office. You have to recognize that this isn’t just a Republican problem. There are Republicans who vote against every spending bill that comes up. Although the GOP has the majority, the Democratic Party has been complicit in Congressional spending. If the Democratic Party was serious about cutting spending, you would have seen them join in with the few fiscally conservative Republicans to kill spending bills…

I’ll be the first to admit that most GOP Congressman have no desire to be fiscally conservative. But to paint the Democratic party as the party to reform our spending habits is just stupid. And you know it. If you are truly a fiscal conservative, Decaturguy, then you should be supporting Mac Collins.

Mac Collins ‘06!

John Spratt is a “free-spending liberal?”

I don’t know what kind of crack YOU are smoking, but I’m really sick and tired of these big spending, big government, liberal Republicans speaking out of both sides of their mouth and saying they are conservative, but spending more than Democrats ever did when they were in power.

The proof is in the pudding. Vote for a change in 2006. Get big spending Republicans, and their committee chairmen, out of office.

Decaturguy,

Can you sell me about 12 ounces of whatever it is that you are smoking? John Spratt is in no way, shape, or form a fiscal conservative.

Unless your definition of “fiscal conservative” is voting against American Taxpayers 83% of the time in 2005, and 90% of the time in 2004. And unless your definition of “fiscal conservative” includes voting against 19/19 Flake Amendments (amendments which cut earmarks from spending bills) this year.

I don’t know who you’re getting your talking points from, Decaturguy, but voting against an amendment here or there is NOT, I repeat, is NOT fiscally conservative. Spratt is a free-spending liberal. I know you were trying to make a point, but trading one free-spending liberal (the “moderate Republican from Iowa”) for another free-spending liberal isn’t going to help taxpayers one damn bit.

Mac Collins ‘06!

Others on this board have in the past mentioned Mac’s detailed knowledge of our difficult and complicated tax system. He can easily go toe-to-toe with any liberal on tax issues and their affect on our Nation’s economy. He’s also well-versed in foreign affairs, military issues, and agriculture, and he will fight for conservative change.

Any way you look at it, Mac Collins is the man for the job in the 8th District.

I didn’t mean “shut your damn mouth” as a threat. I meant it as “quit talking out of your ass”.

The point is, when you make dumbass statements like this:
But I’d really like to hear a reason why Collins should be elected rather than a bunch of desperate robotic Hannity talking points coming out of John Douglas and the rest of you.

Then you should expect someone to call you out for being illiterate or for talking out of your ass like Howard Dean. I prefered the latter of the two.

Now, on to more pressing matters.

(1) I don’t assume that Republicans are going to lose the HOR. I know they are. And they deserve to. They have failed for 6 years to provide me with a reminder of why I should vote Republican.

(2) Democrats, on the other hand, have done nothing but provide me with examples of why I will NEVER vote Democratic.

(3) My concernes with Marshall are fiscal concerns, as I mentioned earlier. Marshall, along with every other democrat in congress, has been complicent in the embarassing spending habits of the GOP controlled congress. If the democrats are in charge, my issues with Marshall will not change. Except, he will have gone from being complicent to being the perpetrator.

(4) Mac Collins will at least TRY to exercise some responsibility with our tax dollars–Just as a growing minority of Republicans TRY to exercise some fiscal conservatism. That’s why Max Collins needs to get into Congress ASAP–to help pull the reigns of the free-spending liberals in both parties.

Oh, I’m real scared.

The real issue here is if Republicans are going to lose the House (and that is your assumption, right, if we’re worried that Marshall will vote for Pelosi for Speaker), all things being equal, why would you choose a Representative (Collins) who would be in the minority, rather than a Representative from the majority party?

If Marshall is going to be in the majority party, and would be in a better position to get things done for his district, then I don’t think the voters really care who he may vote for Speaker.

Maybe you should re-read over my post and JSM’s post if you want a reason. If not, then shut your damn mouth. I personally acknowledged what problems I had with Marshall and stated why I thought Mac Collins would be better. As did JSM.

Hey, I’m not a big fan of Marshall. But I’d really like to hear a reason why Collins should be elected rather than a bunch of desperate robotic Hannity talking points coming out of John Douglas and the rest of you.

Delay has not been convicted of a felony either…

Nancy Pelosi, as much as you may hate her, has not yet committed a felony.