Can you imagine that George Washington, when he was president of the United States, would ever have thought of taxing the American people for Americans to trade in their old, worn out, sway-backed nags on fresh new horses, with the government handing out cash grants of tax money for, say, $100 or so per horse?
Do you think Congress in the time of President Washington would have appropriated tax money for such a thing to "stimulate" the economy, which wasn't exactly booming in those days?
Such a thought is ridiculous. Back then, President Washington and members of Congress would have recognized that nothing in the Constitution empowered them to use taxpayers' money to buy new horses for some of their citizens.
Now look ahead from the late 1700s to the early 2000s, and what do you find? Now we see President Barack Obama and Congress enthusiastically borrowing a billion dollars to hand out up to $4,500 for anyone who will buy a new car to replace a "clunker."
And with the first $1 billion gone, they are considering voting to spend $2 billion more on the "cash for clunkers" idea.
Who do you think had better fiscal -- and constitutional -- judgment, President Washington and the early members of Congress, or President Obama and the big-spending, red-ink Congress of today.
Neither would Prs. Washington, who never tolds a lie, have ever have dreamed of duping congress about weapons of mass destruction as an excuse to invade another country then give billions of tax dollars to favored contractors while giving tax breaks to the rich. And never would he let drug companies write a bill that would net them billions of tax dollars.
Or login with:
New Account