if conservatives are trully fiscally conservative, why do we have a huge deficit?

Question

lets see-clinton-200 billion dollar surplus, bush-300 trillion dollar deficit.
simple economics.

source: every news source on the planet.

Answer 1

The new conservatives are not fiscally conservative. They are more interested in regulating morality- which runs contrary to many old republicans value of less government/less regulation. I am foreseeing a divide in the party very soon.

Answer 2

If I'm not mistaken, I think that Tucker Carlson and/or some other conservative commentators have actually mentioned the fact that Bush isn't a conservative in the true sense of the word. After all, conservatives traditionally believe in having a smaller federal government and delegating more power to the state and local levels. However, under Bush, the federal government has gotten bigger, not smaller. He has expanded executive powers and has implemented domestic spying. Also, he has called for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, despite the fact that marriage laws are traditionally enacted by the states. And like you said, Bush has been anything but fiscally conservative. After all, he's taken Clinton's surplus and turned it into a record deficit. But then again, I guess the Republicans think it's OK to expand the federal government and spend money left and right as long as the oil companies and major corporations who line their pockets benefit from it, the poor get nothing, and the gays don't get married.

Answer 3

I love how conservatives re-write history. THERE WAS A SURPLUS. I know you'd like to pretend that the current present has the slightest clue about econmics. But I think the results speak for themselves.

The only "experts" who think the economy is strong work at or for the white house. It's luke warm at best and frankly we're lucky that it's even that.

If we're going to deficit spend lets do it on something that helps americans. Bush just got another 80 billion for the war.

Do you have any idea what 80 billion would do for the education system in this country?

Answer 4

1 We are at war.
2 Clinton rode a wave of the DotComs. If you can think back you would see that the new economy was a lie. Many lost it all. in the faked numbers Clinton put out.
3 Bush is no Conservative, he is a Republican.( not the same thing)
4 When Clinton was going out the Numbers showed the economy was tanking for about two years.

Answer 5

It's because the people running our gov right now are not really conservatives. They say they are so people would vote them into office. They are Neo-conservatives.

Their real goal is to take this country into the 'New World Order". And that means into fascism and have the ultra wealthy and powerfull in control. They want control over the entire world and what better way than to control the worlds wealthiest country and control of as many oil resources as possible. And that means Iraq and Iran, and the rest of the middle east. Did you think we are at war for humanitarian reasons? Ha!
W has not a humanitarian bone in his body.

And who do you think will be paying off this huge deficet? The wealthy? Ha! Guess again.

Answer 6

Well, it's quite simple. War is our answer. We want a high economy, and you either do that by increasing government spending (that increases the GDP in economic terms) or decreasing taxes. Bush wants money so he goes out and keeps us in a war. However, spending on other organizations has come down in America. Another thing, Clinton was a Democrat. Oh and "truly fiscally conservative"... truth is not a big worry in our government. They'll change their mind as they see fit and back up their answers too! Hope I could help.

Answer 7

Clinton's "surplus" wasn't a real surplus-it was an accounitng shell game. How else do you explain how that "surplus" seemed to magically dry up the moment GW took office.

Bush spends too much, congress lets him. It's one of the things about GW that I don't like.

Answer 8

Because these are neo-cons, not old-cons. Old conservatives were fiscally conservative. Neocons are too busy trying to take over the world to pay attention to a deficit!

Answer 9

If you take a look at the Kennedy education bill and the spending on social programs Bush had to increase because Clinton slashed them, there are your two biggest reasons.

Spending on social programs and education are each at the highest levels in in US history.

Even if it were "simple economics", you and most liberals aren't bright enough to understand it.

Answer 10

We have to give the Democrats a good reason to Tax us to death since they haven't had a good reason since Kennedy was in office.
BTW Clinton was smart. he just stayed out of the way of the ball that Reagan set rolling back in the 1980's. Typically he reaped the benefits of a job he didn't actually do.