Listening to the Democratic contenders, for example, is like listening to a 4-year-old tell Santa what she wants for Christmas -- an array of cherished desires, and no sense that someone has to pay for them. Universal health insurance! Affordable college! Grants for child care! Money for schools! Every doll ever made by American Girl!Could one of you out there who supports a Democrat please explain your reasoning? Seriously. It doesn't make any sense to me.
According to the nonpartisan website PolitiFact, which assesses the accuracy of what candidates say, all the programs envisioned by Hillary Clinton would add about $174 billion a year in outlays. And that was before she unveiled a $70 billion fiscal stimulus plan Friday. Barack Obama, according to a November analysis in the McClatchy newspapers, has promised "at least $181 billion in new annual spending on middle-class tax cuts, health care and retirement and energy plans."
Now for the Republicans.
If Democrats love spending money, Republicans love cutting taxes. Not so long ago, they assured us that lower taxes would inevitably force lower spending. In his time in office, though, President Bush has refuted that claim.If you're supporting someone on the Republican side other than Fred Thompson, can you explain your reasoning to me? Seriously. I don't get how cutting taxes and increasing spending is supposed to work.
Since 2001, federal revenues have declined by 7 percent as a share of gross domestic product, while federal outlays have grown by 9 percent as a share of GDP. When you increase spending without increasing revenue, you aren't cutting taxes but raising them -- for future taxpayers.
How about Fred?
But among the Republicans, only Fred Thompson has been willing to risk the wrath of the elderly by calling for a cut in the growth of Social Security benefits. The supposedly fearless John McCain targets pork-barrel goodies, which are only a small part of the problem. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee strenuously dodge the entitlement issue.Fred Thompson for president.