Originally Posted by jettio
So are you saying that during the 2000 campaign and the public speaking tour he undertook to sell the tax cut plan, B*sh's primary justification for the tax cut plan was the projected surplus, but that his primary justification changed by the time the first tax cuts were passed a few months into his Presidency?
Do you have any evidence of that?
It is undeniable what B*sh said on the campaign trail about the surplus and the tax cut. It is also undeniable that he kept making that same argument in the first months of his Presidency until the tax cuts passed.
I don't remember that B*sh ever changed his primary justification before the tax cuts were passed. However, if he did, is that not further proof that he was flying blind and taking an action based on ideology without regard for reality and consequences?
You should try to meet B*sh and have an extended discussion of his Presidency with him. He knows he messed some things up even if you never want to give him any credit for his mistakes.
I'm saying that both motivations were factors in the first cut. Getting the economy going was the primary factor in the second cut.
"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will