Donovan poses a somewhat sarcastic question "Why do conservatives vote for Republicans, when Democrats achieve their goals?" He cites several areas where Democrats "achieved" success in Republican areas.
One thing that was not included was the fact that Donovan is picking and choosing from Republican administration to compare to just one Democratic Administration, the Clinton Years. For some reason, Jimmy Carter with his double digit inflation is the forgotten man (although Nick doesn’t mind citing Nixon.)
Now, onto the comparisons:
By any measure, Democratic presidents are better at fiscal restraint than Republicans. Who was the last president to pay down the U.S. debt? Clinton. Who was the last president to do it before him? Truman.
Now, most people view raising the debt to be a sign of fiscal irresponsibility. Yet all Republican presidents have done it – and Republicans go on supporting them (typically blaming Democrats, whether they be in the minority or the majority – and thus denying personal responsibility for their own policies).
Really? Clinton was the last President to "pay down the debt". Here is a list of the national debt from September 30, 1992-September 30, 2000 in reverse Chronological Order:
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
So, Donovan, show me the year that the debt was paid down. By paid down that implies it was reduced, yet I don’t see a single year that happened. At the end of each fiscal year, the debt was higher.
The second point is that Donovan is comparing apples to oranges. Were all situations equal economically?
Clinton came into office as events that had been long in motion in the computer industry came to a head. While Donovan gave credit to Clinton, things were already in process for the public launch of the Internet. The result, the .bom boom, a stock market where wild gains in share prices were made on stocks that didn’t make money and venture capitalists invested in start-ups. The result was a lot of money flowing in which increased revenue and balanced the budget. Clinton, himself was resistant to the idea of agreeing to balance in 7 years as the Republican Congress demanded which was actually at the heart of the government shutdown.
In 1980, Reagan came to office with a deciminated military, suffering from low numbers and low morale and also engaged in a global Cold War against Communism. He rebuilt the national defenses and had to deal with a Democratic Congress that didn’t want to cut social spending.
George W. Bush came in to office and within 8 months, America was under attack. The economy was set into a brief recession which weakened the economy. Clinton and Congress had used part of the government surplus to create new programs. The consequence of this was when things went sour, there weren’t funds to pay for the programs. In addition, new military expenses became necessary. Yes, pork barrel projects by Congress played a part, but had Clinton agreed to GOP tax cuts with the surplus, it would not have created the mass of government that we could no longer pay for.
Contrast Nixon’s price control strategies with Clinton’s free market philosophy. Contrast Reagan’s "free market" strategies (spend federal money on defense contractors) with Clinton’s free market strategy (spin-off public sector developments – like the internet, or satellite technologies – toward private sector applications).
No one is listing Nixon as their favorite President. As for Reagan, do you seriously think we’d have our current prosperity with top marginal tax rates of 70% (as was under Jimmy Carter)? Or had Reagan not gotten rid of regulations and agencies that were unnecessary would we see our current prosperity? Reagan made the American dream a reality again by eliminating onerous tax rates and spurring on the economy. Had Jimmy Carter’s 70% tax remained in place, we would never have achieved anything economically or gotten out of the great malaise.
At the personal level, Republicans investigated Whitewater-gate to death; they turned up no felonies (other than failure to make clear statements that someone else was guilty).
Its funny to see how Donovan does math. First falling national debts and now only one felony conviction. The way I count it, 32 felony convictions, 18 alone for Jim McDougal.
Imagine if Clinton had declared "sex" inapplicable to his conduct. (Oh wait, he did…and Republicans despised him for it. Funny how bent out of shape one gets over a blow job, and how one turns aside at widespread torture.)
Funny how one gets all bent out of shape about even the most remote rumors of torture but has little to say about the beheading of innocent people by Islamofascists.
The fact is the issue with Clinton wasn’t sex, it was purgery and obstruction of justice. It was for that, that the US House Impeached Clinton. No one impeached Clinton for any of his other numerous pecadillos or for his crude sexual moves on Kathleen Willey.
Bush Jr. expanded the federal government more than any other president in the last 25 years. Clinton shrunk it – both in terms of personnel (compared to the population of the country), and in terms of budget allotments.
Clinton tried to take over 1/7th of the US Economy. Had he succeeded, those numbers would be far different. So you’re saying Clinton should get bonus points for being ineffective at passing National Healthcare?
Clinton attempted to advance family values by increasing the amount of time that parents might spend on medical leave when new children are born.
Bush attempted to advance family values by saying they were important in numerous speeches.
The former increased family incomes, helped more families acquire houses, and reduced the number of families living in poverty. The latter achieved the opposite, but said families were important.
First of all, Home Ownership rates are at an all-time high. Second point, Bush’s tax bill cuts the marriage penalty and increases the child tax credit by $1000.
We don’t support Democrats, because if Democrats had their way, we’d see a further left court that would attack the family and traditional values, we’d see attempts to take over the Health Care system that would ruin our economy and put more power into the hands of bureaucrats. We’d finally to see an international policy that values terrorists more than American citizens and the United Nations more than the security of the United States.
whereIstand Tags