Jeb Bush: “I don’t think there’s any Bush baggage at all."

[Cigar]

“I don’t think there’s any Bush baggage at all. I love my brother. I’m proud of his accomplishments. I love my dad. I’m proud to be a Bush and if I run for president it’s not because of something in my DNA that compels me to do it,” Bush said on “Fox News Sunday” after host Chris Wallace cited a poll showing the former president with a 49 percent

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/287197-jeb-bush-says-theres-no-bush-baggage-as-he-leaves-door-open-to-run#ixzz2N9aBrYnL

Jeb Bush praises brother's record in lead-up to decision on 2016 run

Former Florida governor tries to mount obstacle of ill-feeling towards George W Bush presidency ahead of his own campaign

Ewen MacAskill in Washington
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 10 March 2013 15.04 EDT

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush praised his brother's presidency, suggesting history would view it favourably, as he made a tour of the Sunday talk shows aimed at getting his own 2016 White House run back on track.

One of the biggest obstacles facing him if he is to mount a White House run could be his name. There is some resistance in the US, a country proud of its democratic credentials, to electing a third Bush into the White House. But the main problem is the negative feelings still arouse by the George W presidency.

Seeking to confront that issue, the former Florida governor told NBC: "In his four years as president a lot of amazing accomplishments took place. So my guess is that history will be kind to my brother, the further out you get from this and the more people compare his tenure to what's going on now."

Bush's hints that he is considering a White House run coincides with the 10th anniversary of the Iraq invasion, the most controversial decision of George W's two terms. His father's presidency is normally seen in a better light, though his decision to stop the first Gulf War in 1991 after the liberation of Kuwait is also seen as controversial, as was reneging on his pledge not to raise taxes.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Pie_hGENp7c/UMSgny3NWyI/AAAAAAAAXS8/Tv0afXORP-0/s1600/Jeb+Bush.JPG.jpg

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush says that the public will view his older brother, former president George W. Bush, more favorably as time passes.

"In his four years as president a lot of amazing accomplishments took place," said Jeb Bush, the son of former President George H.W. Bush, during an interview on NBC's Meet the Press. "So my guess is that history will be kind to my brother, the further out you get from this and the more people compare his tenure to what's going on now."

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/10/17257330-jeb-bush-history-will-be-kind-to-my-brother?lite


http://upload.democraticunderground.com/imgs/2013/130311-i-guess-we-remember-things-differently.jpg

[Pete7469]

I might actually agree with this idiot.

I'll sit out an election if a Bush is on the ballot. We've suffered long enough with the results of the RINO globalist elite Bush family policies.

[Private Pickle]

If it's between Jeb and Hillary...give me Jeb...

[Cigar]

If it's between Jeb and Hillary...give me Jeb...

I hope you get your wish ... I'd love to see a Bush / Clinton Presidential match-up

[Private Pickle]

I hope you get your wish ... I'd love to see a Bush / Clinton Presidential match-up

I would too. Jeb is by far the smartest of the 3 and has flown under the radar enough to avoid most of the moronic idea that just cause your daddy and brother are a certain why, that person is the same.

[Cigar]

I would too. Jeb is by far the smartest of the 3 and has flown under the radar enough to avoid most of the moronic idea that just cause your daddy and brother are a certain why, that person is the same.

Maybe you should spread that little saying around the conservative forums and see how far it gets.

Because that's not what I read ...

[Private Pickle]

Maybe you should spread that little saying around the conservative forums and see how far it gets.

Because that's not what I read ...

Why would I care about making sure people write things you like? That would be a waste of my time. But it's not Conservatives you should worry about. Jeb would have their vote no matter what.

[Peter1469]

Can he possibly spend more than Obama?

[Cigar]

Can he possibly spend more than Obama?

Obama is spending less than Bush

[Private Pickle]

Obama is spending less than Bush

Ummmm....no...that's actually the most laughable statement I've seen from you...ever...

[Cigar]

Ummmm....no...that's actually the most laughable statement I've seen from you...ever...

:grin: Laugh-On ---> http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/

[simpsonofpg]

I would vote for him in a heart beat. Thanks to all the liberals who voted for Obama twice and left our country in a mess.

[Peter1469]

Obama is spending less than Bush

Thanks for the laugh. Obama has spent more money that any man in history.

[Peter1469]

:grin: Laugh-On ---> http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/

Do you even read the articles that you link to?

[Private Pickle]

Do you even read the articles that you link to?

No. He reads the titles then hopes...

[Cigar]

Those who blame deficits solely on spending ignore the other side of the ledger. :rollseyes:

[Peter1469]

Those who blame deficits solely on spending ignore the other side of the ledger. :rollseyes:

I know that math is hard.

But our current spending levels could never be covered by taxation. We are spending ~$1.3T more than we take in tax revenue. If you think it is possible to raise that much in taxes you really need to be institutionalized.

[Cigar]

I know that math is hard.

But our current spending levels could never be covered by taxation. We are spending ~$1.3T more than we take in tax revenue. If you think it is possible to raise that much in taxes you really need to be institutionalized.

... and we can't cut our way to prosperity either.

Remember ... we've already tried Trickle Down for 30 years.

[Peter1469]

... and we can't cut our way to prosperity either.

Remember ... we've already tried Trickle Down for 30 years.

That is what your mother and mine would call a lie.

We have only increased government over the last 30 years. Why do you think our debt is so high? It isn't because we have cut spending.

[Cigar]

That is what your mother and mine would call a lie.

We have only increased government over the last 30 years. Why do you think our debt is so high? It isn't because we have cut spending.

So why is it every time I post cutting subsidies to Big Oil Corps, Corporate Jets and Yachts, people change the subject.

Is that not wasted spending?

If there's a "choice" between investing for the future and giving breaks to people who don't need it ... why is there an argument?

[Peter1469]

So why is it every time I post cutting subsidies to Big Oil Corps, Corporate Jets and Yachts, people change the subject.

Is that not wasted spending?

If there's a "choice" between investing for the future and giving breaks to people who don't need it ... why is there an argument?


I am not against cutting those sorts of things.

But the question is spending within our means. We are going to need about $1.3T in cuts to live within our means. Per year.

That amount of money is unbelievable. We won't do it.

[nic34]

So why is it every time I post cutting subsidies to Big Oil Corps, Corporate Jets and Yachts, people change the subject.

Its not like the president hasn't proposed these things before....

[nic34]

I am not against cutting those sorts of things.

But the question is spending within our means. We are going to need about $1.3T in cuts to live within our means. Per year.

$1.3 in cuts and revenue.

[Peter1469]

$1.3 in cuts and revenue.

But you equate tax increases with revenue.

Even when they will contract the economy and actually bring in less revenue.

[Pete7469]

Obama is spending less than Bush

I rest my case.

1918

[nic34]

But you equate tax increases with revenue.

umm no.... if you have been listening, the revenue part that is still not in the repub vocabulary is revising loopholes and subsidies.... just to begin with...


Even when they will contract the economy and actually bring in less revenue.

That supply side stuff for the last 30 years has put us where we are now with that brief respite during Clinton with a surplus due to the '93 tax increase..... see?

[Pete7469]

If it's between Jeb and Hillary...give me Jeb...

Sure, but I won't even spend the time to vote if that's the choice.

Would you prefer to be kicked in the balls or eat a shit sandwich?

[Mainecoons]

Vote Libertarian.

[Peter1469]

umm no.... if you have been listening, the revenue part that is still not in the repub vocabulary is revising loopholes and subsidies.... just to begin with...



That supply side stuff for the last 30 years has put us where we are now with that brief respite during Clinton with a surplus due to the '93 tax increase..... see?

Go to the CBO website and look at tax revenue.

Why we are here today is because people like you thought it was a good idea to spend ~$1.3T per year more that we a were taking in. If you actually think that taxes could make up that difference, you should be institutionalized. I could toss you a red ball to keep you amused.

[zelmo1234]

:grin: Laugh-On ---> http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/

Nice try but he is responsible for entitlements too???

And trying to push 09 off on Bush will not help

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/chart-graph/1947-2012-federal-government-tax-revenues-vs-spending

Not only is he spending much more, he is taking in less money. So much for tax increases

[zelmo1234]

umm no.... if you have been listening, the revenue part that is still not in the repub vocabulary is revising loopholes and subsidies.... just to begin with...



That supply side stuff for the last 30 years has put us where we are now with that brief respite during Clinton with a surplus due to the '93 tax increase..... see?

You could actaully argue that point, accept for the fact that the surpluses did not come until after the 97 tax cuts. One of the biggest cuts for the wealthy in history!

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/03/tax-cuts-not-the-clinton-tax-hike-produced-the-1990s-boom

When you belong to a party that needs to re-write histroy for their facts it would be time to take an objective look

[Dr. Who]

I know that math is hard.

But our current spending levels could never be covered by taxation. We are spending ~$1.3T more than we take in tax revenue. If you think it is possible to raise that much in taxes you really need to be institutionalized.
IMO, no matter who inherited the mess that Obama inherited, there would be a goodly number of people who would criticize the action taken. You might not have Obamacare, but something equally egregious to some.

[Peter1469]

IMO, no matter who inherited the mess that Obama inherited, there would be a goodly number of people who would criticize the action taken. You might not have Obamacare, but something equally egregious to some.

Yes, both parties are spending us into oblivion. Even Rand Paul's budget does not actually cut spending- only the projected rate of growth.

[Pete7469]

I know that math is hard.

But our current spending levels could never be covered by taxation. We are spending ~$1.3T more than we take in tax revenue. If you think it is possible to raise that much in taxes you really need to be institutionalized.

You mean after all the other completely batshit crazy posts from this foaming-at-the-mouth rabid barking moonbat, you're just now realizing he needs serious professional help?


IMO, no matter who inherited the mess that Obama inherited, there would be a goodly number of people who would criticize the action taken. You might not have Obamacare, but something equally egregious to some.

That's true, we got stuck with a choice between democrook light with a side of Bush vs. a psuedo-intellectual marxist chode smoker who was exalted by the media as a messianic unifier in 2008, and again in 2012. Nothing good would have happened regardless of the results in either race, although I think things might just suck a little less with democrook light.

I do grow weary of the "mess that bathouse barry inherited" line, he didn't just ask for it, he pulled out every stop to achieve the office. He promised he had all the answers, would work with the opposition, cut the debt in half, rebuild our international prestige and stabilize the geo-political landscape.

I no longer think he is just incompetent. It is impossible for someone to have achieved not one single meaningful improvement, let alone complete failure in everything he is responsible for. No one is that inept or unlucky. Jimmy Carter must be incredulous.

[Pete7469]

Yes, both parties are spending us into oblivion. Even Rand Paul's budget does not actually cut spending- only the projected rate of growth.


Isn't the rate of growth mandated for most programs? I forget where I read it, but basically the feds have to add %8 per year to the baseline of the budget, regardless of revenue.

A balanced budget amendment is sorely needed.