S E N T R Y
 
Over America
 
Sentry Over America
 
Sentry Over America's Family of Sites
Home Page and Archives
About Sentry
Contact Us
Next Issue
Previous Issue
Register

"I think it's time to cut them. And in my administration I'll offer a middle-income tax cut that will cut rates on the middle class."—Bill Clinton, before he raised taxes.

Current Issue

Sentry Over America
Farcical Fools at Free Republic
Hall of Reverence
Hall of Shame
Right Resource Directory
Talk Show Host Misfires
Coming Soon--America's Road to Communism

Issue 17
 

Loss of Freedom

United "Statist" America

Defending the Indefensible

Tuesday, May 14, 2002

Year
CPI Inflation
Percent Increase (Decrease) Federal Government Spending
Percent Increase (Decrease) Government Tax Confiscation
1993
3.0%
2.01%
5.78%
1994
2.6%
3.72%
9.03%
1995
2.8%
3.69%
7.41%
1996
3.0%
2.95%
7.49%
1997
2.3%
2.61%
8.69%
1998
1.6%
3.21%
9.02%
1999
2.2%
2.98%
6.14%
2000
3.4%
5.11%
10.82%
2001
2.8%
4.20%
(1.68%)
2002
no estimate
estimate 10.11%
estimate (2.25%)
Average inflation 1993-2001 was 2.6%. Average increase in spending 1993-2001 was 3.8%.
Since the "Republican Sweep" in 94, Republicans have controlled the House, Senate, or the White House
In 1993, Scumbag's first year defiling the White House, spending was $1.409 trillion dollars
In President Bush's first year 2001, spending was $1.864 trillion, a whopping 32% higher than 1993
Since 1994 "Republican Sweep" spending has exceeded inflation by 607.3 billion dollars. See chart below.
Table by Sentry Over America. CPI from Bureau of Labor and Statistics. Receipts and spending from OMB.
 
Since the 1994 "Republican Sweep" spending has ballooned to a sickening degree. If a 1994 baseline figure is used and we look at spending over inflation, the United "Statist" America has spent $607.3 billion more than this inflation adjusted figure—$259.1 billion for the 2002 estimate alone.

The liberal Republicans have not stopped the socialist juggernaut one bit since the Republican Sweep in 1994. Indeed, it has accelerated. Spending, as the table shows, has outgrown inflation. And as the chart shows, spending over inflation is on a hyperbolic curve.

The large drop in tax confiscation in 2001 and 2002 was due to the economic slowdown and the Alan "Greensham" induced stock market crash. Lower tax rates had a near negligible impact.

Even if the Department of Defense was backed out in 2001 and 2002 (we desperately need increased spending there after Clinton's trashing) we still have spending on social waste exceeding the rate of inflation.

This is during Republican Senate control, or Republican House control, or control of both houses, or with Republican Bush and the Republican House. As we move ever deeper into statist land, Bush and Republican apologists attempt to defend the indefensible, but it is starting to fall on a greater number of deaf ears in the Republican core.

FDR + LBJ = GWB

We have a pending retirement looming of the baby boomers with their pending huge expenses on Medicare and Social Security.

At the same time, we have a grave national security risk. As Warren Buffet said last week, he believes a nuclear event will happen and pegs the loss from a well placed small nuke at 1 trillion dollars.

What really is not taken into account would be the "mental destruction" of the people in the USA. There will be a mood of "why work for the future" as the whole country mourns the murder of a loved one as practically everybody will be touched. There will also be a fear of the next event. It is too simplistic to say the USA is resilient and will recover rapidly.

Thus, the need for less wild liberal spending by Bush and the Republicans.

We currently have a 6 trillion dollar debt. Because of this threat, we should be reducing, not expanding, the social waste. We also should be reducing our debt (and boosting the military and border control). Why? We will need the "elasticity" in the debt to recover from a post-nuclear strike. We cannot have a nation in fear and shock with a radioactive wasteland in the United States and hope to recover with a national debt of the current size.

If the debt were lowered through less wasteful Republican spending, then the lower debt could be expanded in a post-nuke economy to help get it moving again. If the government spends a trillion dollars on top of our current debt in that scenario, we will immediately become a third world tax slaving government. Also, would the Japanese buy our Treasury Notes?

"I can't tell you how sorry I feel for the North Korean people. My heart breaks for people who live in a society that is not free, and where there is tremendous starvation." — President George Bush

It will be impossible to reduce tax slavery in the United States with a President who is "sorry" for the state of the North Koreans. N. Korea spends more money per capita on national defense than any other country in the world (America ranks 41st), we send them aid, and they are hell bent on destroying us.

It is an attitude like this from President Bush that has many worried. He can label them part of the "axis of evil" but feeling sorry for a country that spends 33% of its GDP on missiles to export to Arab countries and carry the largest army per population in the world is crazy. At the same time, we feed them and send them aid so that they can use their money to prepare to kill us.

It is curious as to who actually are the 75% or so giving George Bush that high approval rating. What makes that so eerie is that 75% was the approval rating of Scumbag at the peak of impeachment. With such a wild spending spree and horrendous social policies of Mr. Bush, you have to wonder if he has 25% support from the Republicans and 75% from the Democrats.

The table and chart above have a simple story. Bush and the Republicans have spent money like a drunken liberal. Worse, they are endangering the survivability of this country due to its lack of fiscal preparation for potential nuclear tragedies. It is tragic that these Bush apologists continue to ignore these leftist moves—that only encourages even greater leaps by Bush into leftist land.

Tax slavery is entrenched. You do not have freedom with future tax slavery that will be even greater than today—that is inevitable based on this hyperheated spending on this hyperbolic curve upward.

Statism steamrolls on.


You've got that right!

 

. . . More Straight Shooters who are not Bush apologists

On Bush's "Hillary Care" revisited

The president wants to force health care providers to furnish broader and more expensive mental health coverage than they are currently doing. . . Never mind his party affiliation. On this issue, Bush sounds like an old-fashioned Democrat, acting as though a pure heart is all you need to understand the wisdom of a bigger government role. . . Supporters of the tougher mandates assure us that the cost will be trivial -- increasing current premiums by no more than 1 percent. But that still amounts to some $23 billion a year, and if there is any iron law in Washington, it's that health care benefits always end up costing more than we are told by the politicians who approve them. . . It's a fantasy to think the federal government can hand out favors to voters without also imposing burdens on those same voters. But when this delusion grips our leaders, it's probably not treatable. Steve Chapman

On Republicans continuing to ignore the Constitution. For you apologists, on Republicans bloating government statism further.

How often, for example, do we hear congressmen or the president objecting to a bill on the grounds that the government has no business under the Constitution legislating in such areas (campaign finance reform)? In the last few weeks alone, President Bush abandoned efforts to rescind President Clinton's bogus designation of 17 national monuments, endorsed government mandates for mental-health insurance, and awarded $8.35 million in federal grants to help Americans "without access to the financial system" to open bank accounts. David Limbaugh

On Bush's giving aid to one of Bush's "axis of evil" countries

Thanks to U.S. aid, starving North Korea is spending even more money on its 1.1-million-strong army – to fight the United States. . . President Bush, continuing the astonishing policies of the Clinton administration, has actually boasted that this enemy nation is on the US dole. And this is the same nation he described as part of the "axis of evil." "I can't tell you how sorry I feel for the North Korean people," Bush said in February on a visit to South Korea. "My heart breaks for people who live in a society that is not free, and where there is tremendous starvation."-- (Sentry over America Note: the same starving N. Korea that spends more money per capita on its military than any nation on earth, and is building its own missiles and sending them to the Arabs, according to the CIA Factbook) NewsMax

On Bush accelerating the move into statism

They may call it "farm legislation." In reality, what Congress is sending President Bush amounts to a new welfare bill -- and one with a hefty price tag. Once it's signed by the president, it will, along with last year's crop insurance bill, provide farmers with a record $191 billion in direct federal subsidies over the next decade. (And that's the least it would cost. New government estimates show the total could be much higher.) But that isn't the only expense. The bill continues several price-support programs that greatly inflate certain food prices. These programs would cost consumers $271 billion, bringing the total cost of farm policy to $462 billion. That's more than what Congress expects to spend on K-12 education and environmental protection -- combined -- over the next 10 years. It's an amount that breaks down to an average of nearly $4,400 per taxpaying household. Brian Riedl , Heritage Foundation

On the waste, fraud, and wild liberal Republican spending

"In Walker's statement, he is blistering in his criticism of the federal government's accounting methods, controls and inability to provide data that meet even minimal standards for accuracy, timeliness or comparability. He cites "pervasive and generally long-standing material weaknesses" in the government's accounting systems. Says Walker, "The underlying causes of these issues are significant financial management systems weaknesses, problems with fundamental record-keeping and financial reporting, incomplete documentation and weak internal controls." Bruce Bartlett

On Bush apologists

The Republican Party claims to be the party of personal responsibility, yet it has become a party that takes no responsibility for the predicaments in which it finds itself. Instead, Republicans blame bias in the media, or the liar [Clinton] in the White House, or their unprincipled opponents, or even the immorality of the American people to explain their defeats. . . In political warfare, if only one side is shooting, the other side will soon be dead. David Horowitz, article by Phyllis Schaffley

On Bush looking at our enemies as "friendly folks"

And how is the Bush administration handling the Saudi bounty? By saying nothing, that's how. By keeping silent because we need Saudi oil. Silence is our policy toward Saudi Arabia. Bill O'Reilly

On Bush backing down from the Bush Doctrine

President Bush should stop listening to his "experts" and follow his own instincts. He articulated a clear position when he launched the war on terrorism. Any nation that supports or harbors terrorists will be subject to the same treatment as terrorists themselves. Yasser Arafat and the ruling Palestinian Authority meet that definition. The United States should stop trying to discourage Israel from fighting Palestinian terrorism. We are in the same war against the same enemy. Linda Chavez

 

Go To Navigation Links

Archives

 
Sentry Over America
 

Copyright © 2002 Sentry Over America

 

You've got that right!

 

Tired of the centrist mumble? Here are some refreshing comments straight from the"tell it like it is" school.

Straight Shooters who are not Bush apologists

On treating the Saudi thug visiting Bush at his ranch like royalty instead of a terrorist

I am against America until this life ends, until the Day of Judgment...My hatred of America, if part of it was contained in the universe, it would collapse...She is the root of all evils and wickedness on earth...Oh Muslim Ummah don't take the Jews and Christians as allies...Muslim Brothers in Palestine, do not have any mercy, neither compassion on the Jews, their blood, their money, their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. God made them yours. Why don't you enslave their women? Why don't you wage jihad? Why don't you pillage them?" Saudi government cleric Shaikh Saad Al-Buraik, who recently hosted a two-day telethon that raised $109 million for the families of "martyred" Palestinian fighters, article by Cal Thomas

On Bush encouraging more illegals when we face a grave national security threat--and a grave social welfare threat

And over the weekend in his weekly radio address, President Bush again pushed Congress to pass Section 245(i), a mini-amnesty that rewards tens of thousands of aliens who illegally crossed the border or overstayed their visas -- while millions of law-abiding people around the world wait patiently for green cards to become available. Are Republican leaders so afraid of being labeled "racists," and so desperate for votes, that they'll continue to sell out their commitment to the rule of law -- and our national security with it? Michelle Malkin

On Bush's sacrificing principles

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association confirmed that Abdullah requested no women work as air traffic controllers for his flights. But that’s not the outrage. The outrage is that we complied—that our FAA rolled over and did as he asked, then lied about it. . . But instead of doing the right thing—and like a true Texan, telling this rattlesnake where to go—President Bush gave in to him, forcing Israel to give Abdullah’s friend Arafat the freedom we’d never give Abdullah’s friend Bin Laden. Talk about wimpishness. Debbie Schlussel

On waste and fraud continuing under the Bush White House along with their wild liberal spending

"According to an upcoming report by the Citizens Against Government Waste, money appropriated for AIDS prevention is regularly funneled into questionable social programs. For example, STOP Aids project of San Francisco, received nearly $700,000 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2001. Some of the subsidies were used to "sponsor a seminar on "How to make your man tremble with delight. ... In October, the project sponsored "the basics of sadomachiscism" for men "curious about leather and fetish sex."" Armstrong Williams

On more wild liberal Republican spending while tax slavery grows

Tax rates are too high, saving is taxed excessively relative to consumption, some forms of income are taxed two or three times while others are not taxed at all, and in general the tax system is just too complex and in desperate need of radical simplification. Bruce Bartlett

On Bush's huge leap further into leftist land

Some of the more egregious examples include The Farm Security Act; a $73 billion hike in agricultural subsidies enacted with the ostensible purpose of aiding impoverished farmers. However, restrictions that link these subsidies to select crops and total acreage ensure that wealthy farm owners, corporate executives and even other legislators benefit the most. For example, basketball star Scottie Pippen and billionaires Charles Schwaab, David Rockefeller and Ted Turner each received six-digit farm subsidies over the past five years. Armstrong Williams

On Bush's "Unequal Justice Under Law"

And what Mr. Bush may have given the Democrats is an assurance that he will not embarrass their party by aggressively pursuing the Marc Rich pardon investigation. Although the Justice Department continues to say that probe is "on the front burner," agents have told me there is little incentive to get things done. In fact, one investigator said, if you push too hard on the case, you could find yourself in Fargo, N.D. Bill O'Reilly

On Bush's throwing more of the citizens money at our enemies

Now along comes President George W.Bush with a proposal to give $5bn (£3.5bn) in aid to the developing world, a category of nation that, alas, is all too often led by dictators or near-despots, not to mention firebreathing fundamentalists. Amity Shlaes

On the two-faced terrorism policy

"The president will face a tough choice: Follow the War Party and invade Iraq, which will shatter his Arab and allied coalition, or try to force a peace in the Palestinian conflict, which will shatter his domestic coalition. President Bush decided to pursue both courses. He is now on the verge of shattering both coalitions." Pat Buchannon

More on Bush's two-faced terrorism policy

"This nation will do what it takes to defend that which it holds dear." The words spoken Monday could have come from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. They didn't. They came from President Bush, speaking at a rally in Tennessee. But the president's words make it all the more puzzling why he now insists that Israel cannot do the same to defend herself. Linda Chavez

And even more on Bush's two-faced terrorism policy

When it comes to attacks on the United States, President Bush reiterated his commitment to "find the enemy wherever they may hide" and "defend freedom, no matter what the costs." Yet, he tells the Israelis that they cannot hunt down terrorists in the West Bank and that the cost of defending their freedom may well be US support. It is a double standard unworthy of the president and inimical to the interests of the United States. Linda Chavez