It seems to me, with the Medicare bill passing and the attempt on the Energy bill, that conservative columnists are starting to wake up to an obvious fact:
The Bush Administration Is An Out-Of-Control Spender
and that the Republican Congress has been a willing accomplice, or a ringleader, in this issue.
Today, Cal Thomas (who is usually a complete party-line hack) takes exception with this spending:
The Republican "oath" says, "I believe that the proper function of government is to do for the people those things that hvae to be done but cannot be done, or cannot be done as well, by individuals, and that the most effective government is government closest to the people." Would some lawyer please sue the Republican National Committee for violating truth-in-labeling laws?
Smaller government and less spending?
That's a joke.
I've seen a couple of other commentaries in the past week that are along this bent. The fiscal conservatives have realized that the Republicans are NOT fiscal conservatives, and they're not happy:
Truly there is less than a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. If only term limits would catch on! But the very people who are the problem would have to vote for the idea - and there isn't any money in it.
Defense and anti-terrorism spending aside, there is no excuse for much of the rest of it. It is a pathetic betrayal of the faith many had put in the Republican Party to reduce the size and role of government in our lives.
Is it time for another revolution yet? Who's got the tea?
This will stick to Bush at least somewhat, but it seems to me that this can really stick to the Republicans in Congress in elections next year. Lack of fiscal discipline ought to be a heavy D message against Republicans at the federal level everywhere in 2004.