| Unless Rule #1 is "Less money will be spent on this stuff this year than last year, and so on next year, and so on..." they you ain't a fiscal conservative. Period.
Neither of those things is true, with the consequence that no matter how loudly you proclaim the virtues of smaller government and less spending, you are doomed to witness an ever-growing, ever-more-expensive government. For how long have conservatives been calling for spending reductions and smaller government? In what year has the government ever once gotten smaller or spent less? Do you a connection here? Have you heard the saying that doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result, is insane? I agree that it is difficult to see long-term wisdom when the short term is painful. However, many things in life are like this. This is how Bush works. He likes things that take 30 years and produce earth-changing results. Tweaking water policy to save 500 salmon a year is a Clinton program. A Bush program seeks to remake the Middle East, or end welfare dependency in the United States. None of that "small ball" stuff for him. Don't be a "small ball" player. Conservatives have been screaming about spending since the Constitution was ratified. All they've gotten for it is leviathan government. Do you really think that screaming some more is going to do any good? |
You seem to be suffering from the delusion that either (a) you are King, and can rule by decree; or (b) fiscal conservatives are a voting majority in the United States.