Rob said:
Even when you set aside the cost of the Iraq war, George's Bush's spending and growth of government bereaucracy is so prolific that it makes Bill Clinton look like a staunch conservative in retrospect.

Agreed. Clinton never actually spent that much on any of the ideas he promised. He was much more responsible by comparison. It's a sad state of affairs.

Though, don't forget the importance of a sound monetary policy and Bush's failure there. In that aspect, we've been screwed by pretty much every administration since FDR. (Only Reagan seemed to turn back the tide for a while.)

However, the attacking of the Iraq War is another issue. I don't remember the exact details of the statistic I heard, but compared to the general waste of earmark spending, the entire Iraq War (after its all said and done) won't even equal what our legislature spends in either a single month or a single year (I can't remember which). It's astronomical sums of money and it's all because our government is so fucking huge.

I still believe Bush was better than what Kerry would have given us (and what Obama is threatening). Bush was for lower taxes and did restrain spending somewhat in his second term. However, in retrospect, I think Gore would have been better on spending (since the Republicans might not have not let him spend as much as Bush).

What's your opinion on the Supreme Court, Rob? Bush and both of the parties have screwed up our economy to a large degree (for the moment), but for economic "conservatism" to succeed in the long run, it needs the support of good judges as well. Do you believe that the judges which would have been chosen by Gore or Kerry are a non-issue?