Can anyone describe Republican spending as conservative?

Question

With a straight face?

Answer 1

I would not define either of the two major parties as conservative in the fiscal arena of politics and government.

Answer 2

That is the reason they lost the 06 election. It was not the war. We put the republicans in power in 94 and then they started spending like Dems. I think Washington changes people. The republican base was tired of how they were acting, so did not vote for them in the last election. That's why they lost. Republicans need a conservative really bad, it is sad that none of our top candidates are. The best we got is Fred Thompson, but nobody really knows his positions. Most are just hoping he is a conservative, similiarly to Barrack Obama, he came out and was someone other than Hilliary so most people started supporting him not knowing what he truely stands for. Truthfully, I think both sides crop of candidates leave alot to be desired.

Answer 3

No, unfortunately not. Republicans need to return to their conservative roots, or they will lose to the Democrats in '08. Maybe after 4 years of Socialism under Obama or Rodham, Republicans will finally wake up.

Answer 4

Democrats: The occasion for liberals. Republicans: The occasion for conservatives. Conservatives: Capitalist based financial equipment, kinfolk based society Liberals: Marxist based financial equipment, "something is going" society i'm a conservative because of fact i'm student of historic previous. I understand economics and that i understand what works. I additionally understand what retains a society sturdy and what erodes one. it extremely is neither a kinfolk custom nor a private determination unique to my kinfolk's. it extremely is a private determination that's of an analogous opinion with my kinfolk's. The question stirs no thoughts, purely a desire to sell readability.

Answer 5

I don't think so. Every Conservative economist I have heard has said Bush's spending is out of control and that a tax cut in a time of war is unheard of. They all seem to be appalled by his spending.

Answer 6

republican spending, let's see, a huge amount spent on an imaginary war, an amount that could have funded national health care for decades, helped every American citizen, including the soldiers that would have not died or been wounded in Iraq. Sure it was conservative, it funneled billions into Haliburton ( and Dick Cheney's and George Bush's retirement fund). And to all those right wing supporters, dig deep and you will see where the money trail leads you.

Answer 7

In 2000, Bush ran on "Compassionate Conservatism" and this is how has proved it:

Compassionate....Most people died in Texas prisons under his watch than any other time in the history of Texas. Thousands of Americans and over hundred thousand Iraqis have died under his watch. I think, instead of Mr. President, people should call him Mr. Death.

Conservatism...Well, American economy has reached its record deficit, spending is way out of control. He doesn't have money for American kids, their health care and education but he sure keeps ripping off American treasury like his Daddy's wallet to fund a criminal war in Iraq. But yes, he's conservative when it comes to minimizing women's rights and appoint ultra conservatives judges to destroy the impartiality and pragmatism in American judicial system but that's as far as his "conservatism" goes.

So if you think about it, he's neither compassionate nor conservative...he's just bunko artist...a con man! That's how America will remember him.

Answer 8

It isn't. Even the conservative columnist Tucker Carlson has said that Bush isn't a true conservative, because his spending isn't conservative and, also, whereas traditional conservatives tend to favor smaller government, the government has actually gotten much bigger under Bush.

Answer 9

The Republican social agenda is conservative.

But the Republican party is currently led by neo-conservatives, who do not share the same views as fiscal conservatives when it comes to govt spending.

Answer 10

NO.

But it is equally true that the Democrats proposed more spending than what Bush proposed in any of his budgets.

Instead of voting thumbs down on this, why don't you go look it up?

I'm not saying I'm happy with Bush's spending - I'm actually angry about it, angry at Bush. But the only other choice I have is a party that has consistently proposed spending even more.