Friday, September 23, 2005

Out With Elephants, In With Pigs

[[A R G U M E N T S]] * Criticism of Bush from within the GOP’s “big tent” keeps flooding in. Today’s selection comes from the RedState.org site, one of the Web’s saner sources of right-wing philosophy and complaint. Contributor “Nick Danger” writes:
It is becoming increasingly apparent to conservatives that President George W. Bush is simply not on board with their cause. We know this because the newspapers and the blogs are filled every day with criticism of the President’s obvious lack of concern over runaway federal spending, and indeed, his apparent indifference to the sheer size of the federal government.

Instead of championing fiscal discipline and smaller government, the President devotes his time to efforts that are mere distractions from the real issues that conservatives care about. Instead of railing at the Congress for its profligate spending bills, the President
signs these pork-laden monstrosities as if they were nothing, and then wastes his time travelling around the country talking about Social Security. ...

One can only conclude that the President is either, as his liberal detractors suggest, a fool and a bumbler, or he is competent enough but simply does not care about the real issues that conservatives want to see advocated, such as--Hello--cutting the pork.

After all, what is conservatism about if we don’t advocate smaller government? We never get it, but it is vitally important that we advocate, loudly and often, on behalf of the things that are important to us. Indeed, conservatives have been advocating smaller government for decades, since before
Barry Goldwater in 1964. And today the federal government is larger than ever.
READ MORE:Fiscal Policy: Why ‘Stupid’ Fits,” by E.J. Dionne (The Washington Post); “Lame Duck, Big Spender: Surprise--Bush Beats LBJ as Federal Spendthrift,” by Nick Gillespie (Reason); “Vote Republican for Free Lap Dancing,” by Gerard Baker (The Times of London); “This Is Going to Hurt You More Than It’s Going to Hurt Me,” by Tim Grieve (Salon); “The Katrina Tax,” by James Surowiecki (The New Yorker).

1 comment:

Nick Danger said...

I suppose I deserve what happened here, but I think it was a dirty trick on your part to excerpt my article in such a way as to totally alter its meaning.

You have me criticizing President Bush's spending habits, when in fact that was a trick to lure in unsuspecting 'pork busters' so I could beat them up for doing the same old Same Old, when all this screaming about "spending!" hasn't done any good for sixty years.