The Elephant Has No Clothes

Our friend Chris at ontheborderline.nut has a current post with an interesting graph. He asks this telling question:

"Where in the constitution does it say federal taxpayers have to pay for any of the things the federal government has intruded into? To hell with controlling government growth, how about eliminating?"

This question seems to run along the same line the was discussed on a previous post here concerning Dr. Bill's conservative on the radio with Mike Church.

Notice the graph below. I've taken the liberty to box in the Reagan-Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr. presidential years. In addition, I added approximate trend lines to show the direction of growth during the administration blocks.

Chris is equating federal spending per household with government growth. Notice how the trend lines go up in the R-B Sr. and B Jr. years and down in the Clinton years? Who would you say has added the most increase to the growth of government in the past 27 years?

Of course, its people like Chris that foam at the mouth about all those liberals spending us into socialism. Obviously, the truth is he might be foaming at the mouth, but he's talking out of his ass.

Thanks for the interesting graph Chris. Looks like Clinton was the one who was trying hardest in the past 27 years to make your dream a reality...

"You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."

Ronald Reagan

Hey Ronnie, talk is cheap. Too bad you could back up those fancy speech writer phrases with some action. Notice what the Reagan legacy added to the national debt...

Indeed Chris, Where in the constitution does it say federal taxpayers have to pay for any of the things the Republicans have intruded into?

1 comment:

CANRAC said...

Wisconsites are smart enough NOT to listen to these nuts, so they are trying Minnesota where I beleive they will receive the same attention they get in Wisconsin, none. You'd think they'd be busy enough solving crimes which occured years ago that nobody cares about.