Gillespie-RNC-"GOP is better disciplined(increased funding w/reform)

[papau]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=679&ncid=742&e=2&u=/usatoday/20031209/cm_usatoday/12061996

Op/Ed - USATODAY.com

GOP is better disciplined
Tue Dec 9, 7:20 AM ET Add Op/Ed - USATODAY.com to My Yahoo!


By Ed Gillespie

How our federal government spends our tax dollars is as important as how many of them are spent. President Bush and Republicans in Congress are spending less than liberals would like, while implementing important common-sense reforms.

This administration and the GOP majorities in the House and Senate continue to meet the needs of the American people and tackle the tough issues, including some not traditionally associated with our party, such as education and Medicare. In both of these instances, we have placed the highest priority on empowering people with greater choices, just as we've done in the areas of job creation, international trade and energy policy, among others.


Republicans understand that increased funding without measurable reform is unsustainable and unacceptable. This week's signing of a historic bill to add a prescription drug benefit to our Medicare system also enacts important reforms to increase choices for beneficiaries and establish Medical Savings Accounts. These reforms will help ensure that this vital program is solvent for future generations.


Of course, any president's highest priority must be to ensure the safety of the American people. Increased spending that goes to protect us from future terror attacks and win the war on terror is critically necessary, but not unduly burdensome by historic standards. This new war so far has cost 1.5% of our gross domestic product, far less than the major conflicts of the past century, which averaged 36.4% of the GDP (news - web sites).


Bush's budgets demonstrate a commitment to fiscal responsibility. The previous administration's last budget proposed a 15% increase for spending unrelated to national defense, homeland security, entitlement programs and interest on the national debt. Bush's first budget proposed lowering this increase to 6%, his second budget proposed bringing it down to below 5%, and his latest to 2% for next year.


And since the president took office, Democrats in Congress have tried and failed to add more than $1.9 trillion in additional spending to the federal budget, leaving no doubt which party is more disciplined when it comes to fiscal policy. <snip>



Ed Gillespie is chairman of the Republican National Committee (news - web sites).

COMMENT: I did not catch Affordable health care for Americans; modernization without war for developing countries; serious research rather than slogans on global climate; stem cell research unblocked by religious folks - giving those Religious Folks a ban on cloning humans.

Nor did I see much about how Presidents who lead their country into war tend to pay a heavy price at the polls - whatever the economy is doing. Bush alienated the rest of the world, so we are bearing this basically alone. And does anyone care that he misled the American people as to why we were going to war - credibility only an issue against Dems? And does competance matter - as in rosy senario is the name of the Bush Iraq Team that only plans for the best-case scenario."

And the Heritage Foundation laughed at the line "Bush's first budget proposed lowering this increase to 6%, his second budget proposed bringing it down to below 5%, and his latest to 2% for next year." when 154 billion out of a little over 300 billion of increase is non defense, non homeland security descretionary spending passed at Bushes request at the Reagan approved game of understating the budget request while planning on - and passing through a GOP controlled Congress - a bunch of "emergency requests for funds". Will the media let the GOP get away with this? They let Reagan get away with this - but Reagan only controlled the Senate and could pretend the Dems forced him to spend some money. Are the media whores today more greased up than they were for Reagan?

[RobertSeattle]

1. Wow - My BS Detector just went off the scale

I saw Gillespie get beat up pretty well on C-span at some regular guy/press conference in New Hamspire a week or so ago. I think a little light bulb went on his head that he needed to put out some crap about how "disciplined" the GOP is regards to the massive pork they are producing, because many of the "true conservatives" are pretty steamed about all the spending the GOP is pushing.

[papau]

2. I hope you are correct!

:-)

[RobertSeattle]

3. I am correct, but...

Many "true conservatives" (those who truly believe in smaller government, less intrusive government, the strict reading of the Constitution, etc) while they'll harp against Bush, they'll still tend to vote GOP rather than DEM. Perhaps some of them will sit out the next election. Where's Buchanan for President 2004 when we need him?

[BeFree]

4. Sounds like

Gillespie is trying to dig out of a hole. Sounds like he's trying to explain away the miserable failure that his boy george has been. Let him keep talking. Most of the time all you ever hear from the pugs is "I don't know". The more they try to explain away the failures, the more the sheeple will wonder: "Who's that saying, 'The Sky IS NOT Falling!'And why do they keep having to tell us that"

[meow2u3]

5. My Republican-to-English dictionary is lacking the definition

for "disciplined"--until now.

Disciplined: blindly toeing the line of the Republican leadership without doubting the validity of the legislation, etc., nor questioning the integrity and/or honesty of the leaders, if you want to call a bully a leader.