A: This article proves the conservative point that when you cut taxes, tax revenues actually rise due to increased reinvestement and productivity.

Why do you think Bush’s approval numbers were so low? We hated his domestic policies.

On many occasions I asked the question: Where can I go? The Republicans are spending money like drunk Democrats and the Libritarians don’t get the war on terror.
Finally, there are some conservatives that get it and are fighting for what we believe in. Unfortunately, they are outnumbered and we will pay for it for years to come.

Kept under a lid, since it didn’t seem as great a threat at the time as, say, the combination of President Obama and a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress.

Why weren’t y’all as upset about the cost of Medicare Part D as you are about Obama’s socialistic health care schemes?

We were upset, but you dance with the one who brung you (as they say). Given the choice between Bush and Gore, or Bush and Kerry, I think the answer’s obvious.

Please don’t respond that “at least Bush gave us tax cuts.” Is there any reason that no one seemed pissed off that Bush was the biggest taxer in the world?

Why is this about Bush? He’s not the president nor the problem right now. The rank and file of the GOP didn’t always like his domestic policies, especially his spending. Go back and look at the number of complaints about his unwillingness to use his Veto stamp.

On spending, as early as early 2004, even the GOP-friendly Heritage Foundation was upset about Bush/Republican domestic spending. Where were Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the mouthpieces of the right at this time?

Trying to keep John Kerry out of office, and trying to get the Ron Pauloids to shut the hell up and join the winnable fight. Yes, it’s short term vs. long term, but you’ve got to survive to fight again.

Since Republican politicians try to jockey for the position of who can sound the most like Ronald Reagan, why didn’t y’all listen to the person who wrote most of Reagan’s words?

Because she doesn’t sound like Reagan any more. She sounds like an upper-crust Republican who has spent too much time in and around Washington DC. This is exactly the kind of Country Club Repub that Reagan was against.

Memo to the Libertarian Party: Shut the hell up about legalizing drugs, especially the heavy ones. We’ll have that conversation when you can get people to be financially responsible for their own actions.

If you feel we weren’t loud enough, soon enough, thats fine. In the end we can be allies or not, and recriminations for the past are unlikely to be helpful. We have enough enemies to cause us trouble without making more for ourselves.

1. I was frustrated at NCLB, like I am at all federal involvement in education. But NCLB wasn’t a grab for control of almost 1/3 of the US economy and didn’t threaten to destroy our currency.

2. You don’t listen to conservative radio or read conservative papers, do you? Rush was pretty hyped up about “the biggest entitlement expansion EVAR under a supposedly conservative President.” Bush got reamed pretty badly for it in a number of conservative rags. So this question is built on false premises.

3. Tax revenues going up after a mid-recession cut is a feature, not a bug. Taxes are cut, spurring investment, which spurs growth, which results in more actual revenue collected by the government than under the higher rate. This idea has been promoted by conservatives since Reagan.

4. Ranting about Bush spending and the betrayal of conservatism by K-Street Republicans like Mitch McConnell. You don’t listen to Rush, do you?

5. Because Republican politicians thought they could establish a “permanent majority” by ingratiating themselves to special interests via pork-barrel spending, just like the Democrats did for 40 years. The response by conservatives was what similar to #4.

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-fall/decline-fall-american-conservatism.asp

If you are talking about our supposed ‘sabotage’ of Ron Paul, I should point out that some of us worked on his campaign and were horribly disillusioned by the incompetent way it was run.

Speaking for myself, I eventually, grudgingly, realized that Ron Paul would have been a rotten president who would set the pro-freedom movement back for decades had he been elected: he lacked executive ability, was a poor judge of character, and had a habit of surrounding himself with scary people like Gary North, a Christian Dominionist. It does not matter that Ron Paul was the most pro-freedom candidate. He was unacceptable, period.

The lesser of evils is still evil.

It’s not unusual for a person to claim to be a libertarian, but to support government oppression by, say, accepting a position on their local draft board, for example.

‘Libertarian’ is not a team name, like ‘Red Sox’ or ‘Dodger’. It’s a philosophy, and one that was completely and utterly absent from everything the socialist Bush administration did.

“Bart,Your arguments sound, to me, like excuses.”

Or perhaps more like Kubler-Ross’s final stage of grief, with a dash of Reinhold Niebuhr for flavor, and an obeisance to Liebnizian optimality.

Bush may have appointed so-called libertarians to a few positions.

It’s quite obvious from looking at his record that he never actually listened to anything those people had to say.