Tuesday, August 16, 2005

WaPo Editorial Nails Bush For Failing As A Fiscal Conservative

"Bush, who had threatened to veto wasteful spending bills, chose instead to cave in. He did so despite the fact that in addition to a record number of earmarks the transportation bill came with a price tag that he had once called unacceptable. The bill has a declared cost of $286 billion over five years plus a concealed cost of a further $9 billion; Mr. Bush had earlier drawn a line in the sand at $256 billion, then drawn another line at $284 billion. Asked to explain the president's capitulation, a White House spokesman pleaded that at least this law would be less costly than the 2003 Medicare reform. This is a classic case of defining deviancy down.

The nation is at war. It faces large expenses for homeland security. It is about to go through a demographic transition that will strain important entitlement programs. How can this president -- an allegedly conservative president -- believe that the federal government should spend money on the Red River National Wildlife Refuge Visitor Center in Louisiana? Or on the Henry Ford Museum in Michigan? The bill Mr. Bush has signed devotes more than $24 billion to such earmarked projects, continuing a trend in which the use of earmarks has spread steadily each year. Remember, Republicans control the Senate and the House as well as the White House. So somebody remind us: Which is the party of big government?"

-- Washington Post, Aug. 15


Blogger Eric_Jaffa said...


9:33 PM  
Blogger David R. Mark said...

Try this.

9:48 PM  
Blogger ariadne said...

It's about damn time we started pointing out the differences between neo-conservativism and traditional conservativism.

9:25 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares