National Democrats this year are bombarding wavering voters with overblown horror stories about how a Republican Congress will screw up in the same way the previous Republican Congresses did during the G.W. Bush administration. The better comparison would be with what the first Republican Congress in 40 years did in 1995, 1996, and 1997. Set aside some Gingrichian histrionics that made Republicans unpopular on style points: The record shows that a Republican Congress coming in fresh from the wilderness can be extremely productive in passing broadly popular, effective policies.
What the Gingrich Congress did in those first three years -- against calumny from most Democratic colleagues, fierce opposition combined with prevarications from the Clinton White House, and an extraordinarily hostile establishment media -- was nothing short of remarkable. On the substance of domestic policy, it may have been the greatest congressional performance ever. Its performance provides a template for how to do things right, while providing Republican Leader John Boehner (a key figure in 1994 as well) some lessons about the sorts of actions to avoid -- lessons that a duly chastened but energetic Republican Conference can make great use of in 2011 and 2012.
The first thing Gingrich's House did was pass serious ethics reforms. Unlike the Pelosi Democrats, the Gingrich Congress made those reforms stick for more than four years. The GOP banned proxy voting in committee and opened committee meetings to the public. It saved taxpayer money by cutting committee staff by nearly a third. It allowed more "open rules" for fair amendment attempts than had been allowed for ages. It stopped exempting Congress from laws that apply to the rest of the country. It severely limited earmarks. It term-limited committee chairmen. And it began putting all legislation online so the public could read it.
The next thing it did was to carefully but significantly cut domestic discretionary spending. In just two years it cut what was then an astonishing $50 billion from already-established appropriation levels. These were actual savings, not savings from some mythical but ever-rising baseline. Compared to that baseline set by the Democrats in 1994, the GOP savings weren't just $50 billion in Fiscal Years 1995 (via rescissions), 1996 and 1997 combined, but right at $100 billion. This was when domestic discretionary spending was in the $250 billion range, meaning that $50 billion in three fiscal years was the equivalent of about $140 billion of three-year savings from today's $700 billion annual domestic spendathons.
Yet despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, nothing bad happened. Children didn't starve in the streets. Little old ladies didn't freeze to death in gutters. Crime didn't spike. Kidney patients didn't lose dialysis machines. In fact, so carefully did House Appropriations Chairman Bob Livingston and company make the cuts that almost nobody minded the de-funding of hundreds of government programs. Finally, rather than causing the economy to tank from the withdrawal of so much government spending, the Appropriations cuts inspired investor confidence, which in turn catalyzed one of the greatest economic booms in American history.
Meanwhile, the GOP stopped Bill Clinton's cannibalization of the armed forces and rescued missile defense from the scrap heap. If the armed forces weren't as fully funded as they should have been (due to Clinton veto threats), they were far better funded than they would have been if the Gingrich team hadn't taken over. The fruits of that success were evident in 2001-02's the amazing "shock and awe" campaign that overwhelmed the Taliban in Afghanistan and terminated Saddam Hussein's reign of terror in Iraq.
Back to domestic policy: In 1996, the GOP Congress was undeterred by not one but two Clinton vetoes of welfare reform. With undaunted leadership by Clay Shaw and Bill Archer in the House and Rick Santorum in the Senate -- along with some sage political advice from Dick Morris to Bill Clinton -- Republicans finally forced Clinton to sign what is almost certainly the single most successful big reform of a domestic government program since at least World War II. Millions left welfare and went to work. The poverty level dropped significantly. And the government saved tens of billions of dollars. Archer also led the way for some significant tax cuts, including a $500-per-child tax credit. Budget Chairman John Kasich, for his part, kept all the numbers straight and provided an overall budgetary framework -- combined with a tremendous, can-do, bounce-off-walls energy that sometimes drove colleagues to distraction but left no doubt that, yes, the federal government actually could and, miracle of miracles, actually would balance its books. And, for the first time in some three decades, it did indeed balance the federal budget -- no thanks to Clinton, who fought against Republicans, especially rhetorically, every step of the way.
Those seminal successes, and many others, show the good things a GOP Congress can accomplish when it hasn't become jaded and arrogant. In some ways, a Republican House at least is positioned to be more politically successful than the Gingrich Congress was. Part of this better positioning involves personality. Brilliant as Gingrich was, his style was to ratchet up the heat and create conflict. John Boehner is smoother and less likely to turn off the political middle. In 1995 the Majority Leader was Dick Armey, bright but somewhat dyspeptic. The next Majority Leader is likely to be Eric Cantor, both bright and polished. We don't know who the Whip will be, but it almost certainly won't be someone with the sharp elbows of Tom DeLay. And so on. The rising stars in the House -- Mike Pence (if he doesn't run for president), Paul Ryan, Jeb Hensarling, perhaps Jo Bonner from his Ethics Committee perch, and others -- are almost all eminently likable. None is likely to look like his opposition to President Obama springs from an ugly personal bloodlust, which is how the media portrayed the attitude of Gingrich and company in 1995. In sum, a new GOP Congress could offer many of the benefits of the 1995 legislature, without the drawbacks. Moreover, it has a plan for action, known as the Pledge to America, that is both principled and popular with a broad swath of the citizenry. Repeal and replace Obamacare. Freeze federal hiring (except for national security). Jettison Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Roll back outrageous red tape. Repeal the horrendous new paperwork mandate on small businesses. Block tax hikes. Allow bills to be read and analyzed before being voted on. Protect the border. And, in every way, demand adherence to the Constitution that limits the power of the federal Leviathan. These are all things with which most Americans agree. They are actions Americans would support. And they follow principles rooted in what's best in the American tradition.
If Democrats warn against going "back to the future," Republicans should say "bring it on." Just as in the Michael J. Fox movie, a trip back, with a few tweaks, can actually change the future for the better. A future as good as 1995 turned out to be -- combined with the enlightening lessons of the intervening 15 years, and the enthusiasm of an energized populace -- could be a future well worth living with the practical wisdom of a Franklin and the optimism of a Reagan. It is a future most Americans would surely embrace.
IP: Logged
03:10 PM
PFF
System Bot
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
Remember what I have always said, the ray b's and NEPTUNES and the rest of the liberals, have a difficult, if not impossible, time reading. This very informative peice you posted shares indefensible proof of the realism's of the world. I will await patiently, either of these two liberals thoughts. I really doublt I will, since they read a detailed article like this, their mouths may get tired, as liberals they have a tendancy to read while moving their lips. You see, an article like this, may take them a whole month to read. It is far more simple for the liberal to call you a bad name. That give them temporary satisfaction. Then a few minutes later, they will disappear, only to emerge looking to demonize another Fiero member for a mispelling on a memo. It is sad that America has NOT tought many of its citizens any degree of critical thinking.Thanks again fierobear for this find, I enjoyed reading it.
Cordially, Kevin
[This message has been edited by kevin (edited 10-19-2010).]
IP: Logged
04:26 PM
Aug 4th, 2011
Whuffo Member
Posts: 3000 From: San Jose, CA Registered: Jul 2003
Originally posted by fierobear: (a bunch of bullsh*t)
That's nice, but you're a thief. Perhaps you'd like to take a chance at explaining to people here how my Fieros became yours.
This isn't idle muttering, it's fact: Fierobear is a thief. He steals Fieros, he's done that for years.
He graduated from stealing stereo equipment from his employer to stealing cars. He prefers to "acquire" Fieros but that doesn't change the fact that he's stealing them from their rightful owners.
Fierobear (John Szpara) - You know me and you know what I'm saying is true. If you won't admit it and try to make it right, I'll continue to warn people about you; that would be the right thing to do.
Fierobear is a thief - that's a fact and I'll make sure that every Fiero owner knows this.
IP: Logged
10:27 AM
Raydar Member
Posts: 41424 From: Carrollton GA. Out in the... country. Registered: Oct 1999
That's nice, but you're a thief. Perhaps you'd like to take a chance at explaining to people here how my Fieros became yours.
This isn't idle muttering, it's fact: Fierobear is a thief. He steals Fieros, he's done that for years.
He graduated from stealing stereo equipment from his employer to stealing cars. He prefers to "acquire" Fieros but that doesn't change the fact that he's stealing them from their rightful owners.
Fierobear (John Szpara) - You know me and you know what I'm saying is true. If you won't admit it and try to make it right, I'll continue to warn people about you; that would be the right thing to do.
Fierobear is a thief - that's a fact and I'll make sure that every Fiero owner knows this.
You know... I've been reading this bullshit from you for the past few minutes in every fierobear thread you can dig up. I'm assuming you have some proof to back up your accusations?
I'm not defending John. I'm just tired of reading this horse squeeze. Either put up or shut up.
IP: Logged
10:57 AM
Synthesis Member
Posts: 12207 From: Jordan, MN Registered: Feb 2002
That's nice, but you're a thief. Perhaps you'd like to take a chance at explaining to people here how my Fieros became yours.
This isn't idle muttering, it's fact: Fierobear is a thief. He steals Fieros, he's done that for years.
He graduated from stealing stereo equipment from his employer to stealing cars. He prefers to "acquire" Fieros but that doesn't change the fact that he's stealing them from their rightful owners.
Fierobear (John Szpara) - You know me and you know what I'm saying is true. If you won't admit it and try to make it right, I'll continue to warn people about you; that would be the right thing to do.
Fierobear is a thief - that's a fact and I'll make sure that every Fiero owner knows this.
Do not post another member's personal information without his/her consent! So you got really angry with another member and feel you should post his personal information like name, address, telephone number or other private info without his consent. Don't. This is cause for an immediate, nonnegotiable ban from PFF
IP: Logged
12:08 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Total debt went up every year. Any "surplus" was due to creative bookkeeping like ignoring intra-governmental agency debt. There was never a single year where the governemnt took in more money than it spent.
IP: Logged
12:18 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Total debt went up every year. Any "surplus" was due to creative bookkeeping like ignoring intra-governmental agency debt. There was never a single year where the governemnt took in more money than it spent.
especially when a republican was in charge
------------------ 1985 Fiero SE - Plain Red 3.1 V6 Coupe Engle18Cam DIS 4.10-4spd 7730 WCF Long Tubes Borla D.A.M.M. - Drunks Against Mad Mothers
I was wondering where all these FieroBear threads were coming from. I did not look at the dates until this one.
Hey Whuffo, I am not FieroBear's BIGGEST FAN or anything, but what you are doing is the wrong way. First, as Don said, posting his personal info is STRICTLY not allowed by forum rules. Secondly, no matter how much we dont like people, most of us will agree to stay on topic. You are WAAAAAY off.
People here have had problems like this before. If Bear ripped you off on a fiero transaction, and you must post about it, I suggest you take it to the mall, explain the situation in a non-personal way, and maybe it will get worked out, or at least you will "get the word out" on FieroBear so people who are on the fence won't do business with him.
You ought to go back and edit out these posts and do it the right way, otherwise I could see you not being around here much longer regardless of how many positive ratings you have at the moment.
IP: Logged
12:23 PM
PFF
System Bot
avengador1 Member
Posts: 35468 From: Orlando, Florida Registered: Oct 2001
Originally posted by MrsBear Whuffo is not only attacking Fierobear he is also pulling up and posting nasty comments to Toddster and Pokeyfiero too.
Here is my version of the story:
Whuffo was GGF Prez after Fierobear retired. Whuffo got into an argument with is wife and Fierobear and I offered to have him stay with us for a few days while he got himself together. He said he would pay us back when he got money from an account he was hiding from the wife. Well after several months (not days) we asked Whuffo to start paying rent if he was not planning on moving out. We charged him over half what I am collecting now for the rooms I am renting in our house and we fed him too. Whuffo sometimes would by groceries, cook meals and help clean the house a bit. Whuffo had access to our shop and would work on other peoples Fieros to generate some income. Whuffo also started a relationship with my sister who was living in our house too.
Our property is a little over an acre and we have plenty of land to park Fieros. We store several club members Fieros on our land and we have arrangements with all of them. All other Fieros are ours and we have the pinks to show for them.
When Whuffo finally did move out he left two of his Fieros in our prime parking area without the keys to move them in case of emergency or whatever. We asked him several times to come get them or pay for their storage. We took several days off waiting for him to come get his cars. We offered to use our trailer to move them for him. After a couple of months of this we finally had a new renter that would need the parking space that Whuffo's cars were occupying. When we asked him to come get his cars he finally responded with 2 letters. One to me stating he wanted some of his rent back and was going to take me to court and the other letter was to Fierobear stating that items he stored in our shop were stolen and he wanted to be paid back before he would move his cars. Whuffo was saying in his letter that a camera worth other $2000 (claimed on his divorse papers with a value of $200) was missing along with a box of Fieroparts. He said in an email that any further contact from us would be harrassment.
After checking out legally what we were responcible for we called a towing company and had the cars towed away. This cost us money to pay for the towing. We gave the towing company information to contact Michael so he could come get his cars from them. Unfortunately Whuffo did not keep his registration information up to date and the towing company's notices went to the wrong addresses. When Whuffo did not get his cars we sent him an email to be sure he knew where to get them. He did not go pick up his cars and left them at the towing company. The towing company sold the cars.
One car went to a friend of ours who blew up the engine and it is now parked back on our property again. (Another story)
Whuffo abandoned the cars on our property, he did not claim them from the towing company and he likes to broadcast that his Fieros were stolen. No police reports have been filed for stolen cars and any items Whuffo claims to have lost are his own responcibilty.
Thats my story.
Sounds like Whuffo is butthurt because he wasn't responsible with his own property. Now he is trying to blame others for his own shortcomings. Here is a word he needs to learn.
li·bel    [lahy-buhl] Show IPA noun, verb, -beled, -bel·ing or (especially British) -belled, -bel·ling.
noun 1. Law . a. defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.
b. the act or crime of publishing it.
c. a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge.
2. anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
verb (used with object) 3. to publish a libel against.
4. to misrepresent damagingly.
5. to institute suit against by a libel, as in an admiralty court.
ok so you claim the "surplus" during Clinton's term was'nt because of him, or his economic policy, but the republicans?.. Well then you need to take credit for the failing of the economy as well, as your party was running the show when that happened as well..
Nah Regan's economic policy had nothing to do with it at all, even though he increased the national debt higher than any 3 presidents in the past 35 years, still waiting on the "trickle down" of cash he promised!.. Which was raised even higher by Old man Bush.. Only to be turned into a "surplus" by Clinton's economic policy.. Err wait, your right, that was all the republicans too.. Only to have that "surplus" of cash totally destroyed by Dubbya's economic policy's, but the republicans created the surplus right? So its ok if they totally wipe it out and put us into debt like never before.. Then after Bush bailed and left Obama with a big fat bill to pay off, and a hugh economic mess, Obama had to spend more in order to attempt to fix everything Bush, and the republicans broke.. Which he still hasent done, and probably wont be able too himself..
So for once i agree with you FieroBear!!!
I give the republicans full credit for everything!!!
quote
Originally posted by kevin:
fierobear,
Remember what I have always said, the ray b's and NEPTUNES and the rest of the liberals, have a difficult, if not impossible, time reading. This very informative peice you posted shares indefensible proof of the realism's of the world. I will await patiently, either of these two liberals thoughts. I really doublt I will, since they read a detailed article like this, their mouths may get tired, as liberals they have a tendancy to read while moving their lips. You see, an article like this, may take them a whole month to read. It is far more simple for the liberal to call you a bad name. That give them temporary satisfaction. Then a few minutes later, they will disappear, only to emerge looking to demonize another Fiero member for a mispelling on a memo. It is sad that America has NOT tought many of its citizens any degree of critical thinking.Thanks again fierobear for this find, I enjoyed reading it.
Cordially, Kevin
And as for Kevin, i don't consider myself a liberal, but im not conservative either.. But i also don't have any "difficult or impossible" time reading anything, and if you would have been an @sshole enough to say something that blatantly rude and obnoxious, not to mention arrogant to my face, i would have stuck my boot right up your ass..
Cordially, Jonesy.
[This message has been edited by Jonesy (edited 08-04-2011).]
IP: Logged
04:39 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Nah Regan's economic policy had nothing to do with it at all, even though he increased the national debt higher than any 3 presidents in the past 35 years
You must be referring to any 3 presidents in the 35 years previous to Reagan. From 1980 - 1988 the US Debt went from about $907 Billion to $2.6 Trillion, for an increase in total US Debt of $1.7 Trillion. That's not much more than Obama's deficit for ONE YEAR.
IP: Logged
06:36 PM
Patrick's Dad Member
Posts: 5154 From: Weymouth MA USA Registered: Feb 2000
Sounds like Whuffo is butthurt because he wasn't responsible with his own property. Now he is trying to blame others for his own shortcomings. Here is a word he needs to learn.
I posted some more details in the "Republican Watch" thread.
IP: Logged
09:03 PM
USFiero Member
Posts: 4879 From: Everywhere and Middle of Nowhere Registered: Mar 2002
Originally posted by Pyrthian: especially when a republican was in charge
one of those presidents was a one-term presidents... you notice how the congress/senate would swing back and forth between the parties opposed to the president? Checks and Balance? Or are the American people being gamed? Whether the 'Tea Party' can pull the Republicans right or split the party it would lead to a similar effect on the Dems. There are already subdivisions within the Democratic party, I wouldn't mind seeing an 'Independent' party split the 'left.'
Once again the problem is people focus too much on the President. He's only one branch of the government. We don't have a king and a Parliament. If you can break up the grip of the two-party system on the houses, you have a better representation in the government.
IP: Logged
10:50 PM
Aug 5th, 2011
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
Originally posted by USFiero: one of those presidents was a one-term presidents... you notice how the congress/senate would swing back and forth between the parties opposed to the president? Checks and Balance? Or are the American people being gamed? Whether the 'Tea Party' can pull the Republicans right or split the party it would lead to a similar effect on the Dems. There are already subdivisions within the Democratic party, I wouldn't mind seeing an 'Independent' party split the 'left.'
Once again the problem is people focus too much on the President. He's only one branch of the government. We don't have a king and a Parliament. If you can break up the grip of the two-party system on the houses, you have a better representation in the government.
yes, I completely agree. often it seems the president is actually a distraction for those really in charge. which our last 2 prez's have made VERY clear, and if you look further back, you see signs that the prez is just the icon strapped to the front of a steaming locomotive.
yes, I completely agree. often it seems the president is actually a distraction for those really in charge. which our last 2 prez's have made VERY clear, and if you look further back, you see signs that the prez is just the icon strapped to the front of a steaming locomotive.
quote
"Sure, the media tries to put a sad face on these things, painting them up as great human tragedies. But we all know the function of the media has never been... to eliminate the evils of the world, no. Their job is to persuade us to accept those evils and get used to living with them. The powers that be want us to be passive observers. And they haven't given us any other options... outside the occasional, purely symbolic, participatory act of voting. You want the puppet on the right or the puppet on the left?"
IP: Logged
10:56 AM
Aug 11th, 2011
USFiero Member
Posts: 4879 From: Everywhere and Middle of Nowhere Registered: Mar 2002
The other problem with that info-graphic Pyrthian is I suspect those increases were percentages over the previous administration, so there's always going to be a skewed percentage. Carter was president before Regan, and he was a tightwad. One of the reasons he didn't get re-elected, but Regan could only compensate for all the non-spending..
