From: John Cuccia 

On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:36:28 -0500, Monte Davis
 wrote:

>John Cuccia  wrote:
>
>>W simply isn't a conservative
>
>As more and more conservatives, yawning and rubbing their eyes, are
>discovering.
>
>Peggy Noonan's "Hey, Big Spender" in the WSJ today, all injured
>innocence:
>
>"Mr. President: Did you ever hold conservative notions and assumptions
>on the issue of spending?

GWB: No.  I've always viewed government spending as a way to reward my
cronies and consolidate power.  I'm an old school politician, cut from the
mold of the great Democratic urban political machines of the last century,
where you're either with me or against me.  If you're with me, the trough
is open to you.  If you're agin me, then fuck you.

>If so, did you abandon them after the trauma
>of 9/11? For what reasons, exactly? Did you intend to revert to
>conservative thinking on spending at some point? Do you still?

GWB: All moot questions, as I've already admitted that I  was never a conservative.

>"Were you always a liberal on spending?

GWG: Yes. Here's what George Will said about me just this morning:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/15/AR2006031502177
.html
As California's governor, Ronald Reagan used his line-item veto to cut an
average of 2 percent from spending bills. The governor of Texas from 1995
through 2000 used his line-item veto on bills totaling
$265.1 billion -- cutting just .043 percent from those bills that he
said reflected his state's conservatism.

>Were you, or are you, frankly
>baffled that conservatives assumed you were a conservative on
>spending?

GWB: Of course not.  I expect them to assume as much, since a) I've been
lying to them about it for the past 10 to 15 years, and b) power is more
important to them than principle.

>Did you feel they misunderstood you?  Did you allow or
>encourage them to misunderstand you?

GWB: To the 2nd, absolutely.  To the first, no they didn't really
misunderstand, they knew deep in their hearts that it was all a lie, but
they didn't care.  As I said above, they are, like me,  more interested in
getting and maintaining power than in any principle.

>"What are the implications for our country if spending levels continue
>to grow at their current pace?..."

GWB: Who cares?  I'll be long gone.  Someone else can deal with the carcass.

>It seems to be harder to ignore that man behind the curtain this time
>around... but I'm sure the Barktopian Busheviks are up to the task.

JC: I'm waiting with bated breath.  It should be fun.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5