I think you must have missed what Mr. Snow had said in his essay:
"When Democratic presidents have to horse trade with a Republican Congress, spending falls. The opposite happens when a Republican president has to haggle with Democrats."
I did not vote for George Bush for President because I was convinced he was just like his dad.
But I am half tempted to vote for a democrat for President, so that we have gridlock again, similar to the Clinton years.
And you are still wrong. ; )
I guess the safety of the citizens of the United States doesn't concern you? I'm sorry, but if enough folks act like you we'll end up with President Dean and an awful lot of dead Americans.
Which reflects on you more than anything else.
Bush I spent $100 billion more (in constant 2003 dollars) than Bush II. Bush I left unfinished business in the sands of Iraq, Bush II has the cojones to stand up to the world and take care of business. Bush I allowed himself to be hamstrung by both the Democrats and the far right on his economic agenda, and allowed himself to be sacrificed.
It was by his violation of his "read my lips" pledge, that he was able to get the Democrats in Congress to go along with the his budgetary cutbacks, completing the Reagan economical plan, and setting in place the greatest period of economic growth this nation has ever seen. Something Clinton took credit for.
This is no Bush I, this Bush has cojones.
Why not just vote Constitution Party? That way, if the Democrat gets elected, the gridlock will be even more in favor of conservatives.