George Dubbya Should Get a Gold Medal!

Now maybe I’m wrong, but weren’t Republicans supposed to be the so-called “party of fiscal responsibility?” Aren’t Republicans the same folks who blast “tax and spend liberals” who if elected will raise taxes and ruin our economy?

If that’s really the case, then how do conservatives explain the fact that our current President, the esteemed George W. Bush, has run our economy into the ground, and in doing so, has run up a record budget deficit for the 2009 budget year? Jim Nussle, director of the Office of Budget and Management, has projected a record federal budget deficit of 482 billion dollars for 2009.

After news of the record budget deficit hit Washington, the knives came out as Democrats rushed to blame President Bush, with my favorite comments coming from Democratic Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, chairman of the Senate Committee on Budget:

“If they gave out Olympic medals for fiscal irresponsibility, President Bush would take the gold, silver and bronze,” Conrad said. “With his eight years in office, he will have had the five highest deficits ever recorded. And the highest of those deficits is now projected to come in 2009, as he leaves office.”

Sen. Conrad also blasted the administration for its “reckless fiscal policies,” blaming the president’s tax cuts for driving the government into deficit and saying Bush “will be remembered as the most fiscally irresponsible president in our nation’s history.”

Ladies and gentlemen, let’s give George W. Bush a gold medal, or maybe a gold star, because he’s sure earned it for all the “good work” he’s done to keep our economy strong!


Related Articles

9 thoughts on “George Dubbya Should Get a Gold Medal!

  1. Again Zach you only tell half of the story and you must think your readers have an IQ of 50.

    The rising deficit for 2009 marks a sharp turnaround for Bush’s fiscal legacy. He inherited a $128 billion surplus when he came into office in 2001. It soon turned to red ink because of a recession, the Sept. 11 attacks and the war on terrorism.

    The deficit numbers for 2008 and 2009 represent about 3 percent of the size of the economy, which is the measure seen as most relevant by economists. By that measure, the 2008 and 2009 deficits would be smaller than the deficits of the 1980s and early 1990s that led Congress and earlier administrations to cobble together politically painful deficit-reduction packages.

    As a share of the economy, the 2009 deficit would be 3% to 4%, below the post-World War II record of 6% set in 1983.

    You are right give Bush a metal because if Gore was President it would have been much worse and if Obama gets in watch out for his spending on social programs. We need to reduce programs and the size of government not make them larger as the left likes to do.

    At anytime the Democrats that control Congress could have forced a balanced budget, yet they did not. Why is the real question you should be asking yourself. BTW nice picture of Bush and the disrespect you show. Where did you download the picture from?

  2. Jeff, it’s interesting to see you mention the left liking to make the size of government larger, and I have a question for you about that statement.

    Are you ready?

    Here’s my question: Who’s the only President since World War II to preside over an economy in which federal government employment rose more rapidly than employment in the private sector?

    Let me know if you figure that out, and if you can’t, I’d be glad to give you the answer.

    Oh, and as for the picture, I got it from a simple Yahoo! search…gotta love the internet!

  3. George W. Bush

    But not understanding why that is simply makes it too easy for uninformed and those who wish to just discredit Bush to just make statements like you have.

    “That is not because federal government jobs have risen at an unusually rapid rate over the last seven years — although the increase did reverse a substantial decline under Mr. Bush’s most recent predecessor, Bill Clinton.

    Instead, it is because job gains in the private sector were modest even after the economy recovered from the 2001 recession. In 2005, private sector employment rose 2 percent, the best annual growth rate during the Bush administration, but the rate fell to 1.4 percent in 2006 and 0.7 percent in 2007. In contrast, in six of the eight Clinton years growth was above 2 percent.”

  4. So let’s recap.

    Under Democrat Bill Clinton, the size of the federal government actually decreased, while under Republican George W. Bush, the size of the federal government increased. That fact flies in the face of your assertion that the left likes to make the size of government larger, doesn’t it?

  5. I’m a conservative but I cannot defend the over-spending of the Bush Administration and the RINOs in Congress.

    According to a May 2005 CATO Institute policy nalysis, “President Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget doesn’t cut enough spending to change his place in history, either.”

    CATO’s analysis also concluded that, “The Republican Congress has enthusiastically assisted the budget bloat. Inflation-adjusted spending on the combined budgets of the 101 largest programs they vowed to eliminate in 1995 has grown by 27 percent. … The GOP establishment in Washington today has become a defender of big government.”

    Democrats have absolutely nothing to be proud of, either.

    Here is the link for the full text of the CATO analysis:

  6. Civics 101, congress proposes budgets all the president can do is veto or approve,

    The democrats are in control of congress. Again Congress controls spending. Who is in charge of congress? Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi…

    As a percentage of GDP the money isn’t being wasted on wars… It is being wasted on entitlement programs. What is the Democrats solution? Create a new, gigantic entitlement program that won’t work.

    Fred, President Bush is not a Fiscal Conservative and should not be painted as such.

  7. “As a percentage of GDP the money isn’t being wasted on wars… It is being wasted on entitlement programs.”

    Really Jeff? Entitlement programs are to blame for the ballooning budget deficit? The Congressional Budget Office begs to differ:


    According to that, entitlement spending accounts for only 9% of the spending that has contributed to increased budget deficits, while the Bush tax cuts and spending on wars accounts for 85% of the spending that has contributed to our massive budget deficits.

Comments are closed.