Random commentary and senseless acts of blogging.
The first Republican president once said, "While the people retain their virtue and their vigilance, no administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can seriously injure the government in the short space of four years." If Mr. Lincoln could see what's happened in these last three-and-a-half years, he might hedge a little on that statement.
Prisoners of Azkaban
Monday, February 24, 2003
The Chicago Tribune (link from Calpundit) recently noted that George Bush was offended by Greenspan's recent testimony against further deficit increases:
When he publicly undercut President Bush's proposals to stimulate the economy, Alan Greenspan opened the door to widespread speculation that his career as chairman of the Federal Reserve may be drawing to a close.
The Fed chief angered the White House and many Republicans on Capitol Hill when he testified recently that Bush's proposed tax cuts were premature and that they should be offset by tax increases or spending reductions to keep the deficit under control.
This seems a little peculiar. Isn't Greenspan's advice that tax cuts be accompanied by spending cuts exactly what Bush and his geek chorus are claiming to support? This article (also cited in Michael Kinsley's recent evisceration of Bush's budgetary fantasies) quotes his own adviser:
We're being told over and over that this deficit isn't a real deficit, it's a cunning plan to reduce the size of government. So why does Bush get so offended when somebody acts as if he takes his own PR seriously?