Posted on 02/27/2006 6:07:48 AM PST by KyleM
**I really don't believe there is a workable majority of 'small government believers' out there among the constituents that rel,ably vote GOP.**
The government is run by lobbyists and conservatives have lobbyists who tend to be single issue folks. The Congress funds a program and then the natural lobbyists are those getting the money. They are funded to worry about their money expanding and work hard - day and and day out to protect their money.
Conservatives are worried about what? - not spending money but also we are not targeting cuts. If we were following a plan to reduce government, we would be more effective. We totally dropped the idea of getting the government out of the Education business and in our weakness let Bush do "No Child Left Behind" with our Congress.
mike pence in 08!@
ping
Conservatives know that the only way to get their social agenda in place is to make sure they get elected by spending as much or more than their Liberal counterparts. "Smaller government" isn't on the menu anymore.
What did the war have to with expanding the dept. of education from 42 billion in 2001 to 73 billion this year?
Hope I'm wrong about this, but my gut tells me hard times are ahead for the conservative movement in America today. And I WILL blame it on the Jekyll and Hyde Presidency of Dubya Bush.
The GOP seems to be morphing back into the way it use to be before Ronald Reagan came along and ran for POTUS in 1976/1980. The Rockefeller wing of the GOP, aka. moderate-centrist-liberal wing of the GOP, has been gaining influence over the traditional mainstream conservative agenda that operated in the 1980`s under Reagan, through Gingrich in the 1990`s. Yeah, Bush is pro-defense, pro-life and an instinctive conservative tax cutter. But on domestic spending issues he's been a big disappointment. Big government Republicanism rules with Dubya Bush. And Bush`s opposition to real immigration reform, has been a utter failure.
Just as conservatives need to remain vigilant in the WOT, we also need to remain vigilant when it comes to advancing a conservative agenda for America. If we don't, we'll be stuck with more moderate-centrist-liberal Republicans, running the big government show, in status quo Washington DC.
"You would feel so much more secure and happy with Al Sharpton's party in power."
I sure as **** would not! But I am not happy with the republicans acting like dems. Until we get term limits and kick the lobbyists out of Washington it is going to be harder and harder to tell Republicans from Dems.
There are other ways beyond term limits...lobbying is what it is called. It is being attacked by the mccaniacs.
The Dems did not have Congressional power to spend the past six years so Republicans could not be outspending them. What you are saying is that Republicans increased spending from what they spent the past six years.
If Democrats did have power, they would have taken over gas prices with the hike in cost this past couple of years (see Hawaii) and they would have outspent Republicans.
Don't be so sure.
Discretionary spending rose 48.5 percent in Bush's first term, according to Cato Institute, twice as much as in two terms under President Bill Clinton, when spending rose 21.6 percent. Adjusted for inflation, Bush has increased total spending at an annualized rate of 5.6 percent, compared with 1.5 percent under Clinton.
The fact is that congress spends money. So our Republican Congress cut spending while Clinton was in power and they increased spending while Bush was in power.
Listen to him? They are more likely to boot him out.
pence ping!
Thank you!!!
Sadly, that's why the GOP is starting to look like the democrat party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.