To the editor:

Oct 022005

This is in response to Tim Waddingham's Wednesday opinion article, "President not being conservative with government funds."

The claim that Clinton fixed budget problems created by Reagan and Bush Sr. isn't just ridiculous, it's also a boldfaced lie. Most of the expenditures Mr. Waddingham claims to have been caused by the Bush administration were initiated by a democratically controlled congress during Clinton's second term. Mr. Waddingham fails to mention something called beauracracy, which has been a huge problem in this country for decades, and it's not uncommon for expenditures created 10 years ago to finally be spent now. Also, the current deficits must be adjusted for inflation and according to an article by the National Review, Bush's deficit in 2004 is actually smaller than Clinton's in 1993, by about $20 billion! What Mr. Waddingham is doing, in a cruel and unprofessional way, is giving us statistics without interpretation. I know you, Mr. Waddingham, are in favor of a tax hike, but I am not. If you want to take off another $1,000 from your paycheck, if you receive one at all, for taxes, then go ahead. I don't want to, and neither should any working American. Mr. Waddingham is just spilling the infamous far-left rhetoric for people who either get paid way too much or not at all, and so are comfortable with the idea of tax raises because either way it doesn't affect them. Good try Mr. Waddingham, but I'm not buying it!

Robert Drost



 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.