To: Deut28
No you missed the point entirely, Bush & the Republicans despite what they ran on have been spending worse than Liberals and haven’t been governing as Fiscal Conservatives, thus they got their asses handed to them in 2006. Fiscal Conservatism didn’t lose, it wasn’t even an option.
Your history is off also, in 1994 the Contract with America, 9 of the 10 provisions were aimed at the Fiscal Conservatives/small governor crowd (the 10th, #4, was just a token common sense thing about adoption) and we won big.
A decade later, the Republicans have abandoned their fiscal side and have paid the price. Putting forth Hucknanny as the nominee will only further the disaster.
23 posted on
12/14/2007 7:20:33 AM PST by
qam1
(There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
To: Eric Blair 2084; flashbunny; NeoCaveman; SoConPubbie; Esther Ruth; pissant; pandoraou812; ...
25 posted on
12/14/2007 7:26:01 AM PST by
OB1kNOb
(Support Duncan Hunter for the 2008 GOP presidential nominee. He is THE true conservative candidate.)
To: qam1
2 things.
My point was simply that Fiscal Conservatism hasn’t won recently. I made no commentary to suggest that it was ever an option, and indeed pointed out that Bush’s platform was decisively NOT fiscally conservative.
This discussion, and especially my posts, have been about Presidential politics, not Congressional.
31 posted on
12/14/2007 7:40:58 AM PST by
Deut28
(Cursed be he who perverts the justice)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson