Lew Hodgett wrote:

"Rod & BJ Jacobson" wrote:

.... snip
Senator Bunning had no problem voting for unfunded things like tax
cuts for the high income folks or the war on Iraq during the Bush
years.


Same old BS. EVERYBODY GOT A TAX CUT! What is it about percentage math
don't you libs understand? Yeah, somebody making $150k and getting a 10%
tax cut will get more absolute dollars, but he still only gets the same
percentage cut as somebody making half that. The other fact, as
demonstrated in the negative by the current administration, is that tax cuts
actually raise revenue and help the economy recover from bad times because
it frees up the ability of people to invest which then creates jobs that in
turn fuel more taxable income. This has been demonstrated time and time
again -- there is an initial drop in revenue, then revenue starts coming
back at a larger amount than before as the economy grows.


George W Bush told Congress what he wanted, Bunning delivered his
vote.

Wonder why he all of a sudden he is getting fiscal religion?


Why were the other party so dead set against using stimulus funds instead
of new borrowing to pay for this? You don't suppose it might have been that
this would provide more money to buy desperately needed votes for the coming
election cycle while leaving the "stimulus" payoff money available for even
more vote purchasing? Why couldn't they take a paltry few billion out of
the $500B that hasn't yet been spent?


Just curious.

No you're not, you are just regurgitating the talking points for those who
are pushing a command economy.



Lew

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham