Republicans love to talk about smaller government and less intrusion?

As a party, the GOP has NEVER embraced "smaller government". From its earliest history, it was the party for STRONG Federal government, being the party of the Union during the Civil War. It did not change this - EVER.

It was the party of McCarthyism in the 1950s, remember? The party of the MIC - which it was in 1861 and still was in 1954 and still is today. "Economic stimulus" through massive government spending on contracts to employ people under the guise of "defense" needs.

This "smaller government" rhetoric began in 1964 and what it MEANT was "No civil rights legsilation". Barry Goldwater was the first Republican Presidential candidate to champion a "state's rights" platform on the issue of racial segregation ONLY. It remains a buzzword for former Dixiecrats whose main focus in politics is their own racism. "Smaller government" to them means ONLY "No feds protecting the knee-groes from our oppression".

Read this quote from LEE ATWATER, Ronald Reagan's campaign brain on the "Southern Strategy" for Reagan's campaign. He gave it anonomously as a quote in 1981. His identity as the speaker was revealed after he died in 1991.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/25/opinion/25herber...

Post 1964 GOP politics are only about ONE issue of "smaller government".

After that, they ARE the party of massive government expansion, massive expansion of Federal powers and massive Federal spending.

Because ... Those are CHOISES that were BAD Judgements !!! THE American Government has NO business getting involved in SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM/LIBERALISM !!! Democrats have to recognize that since the 73rd Congress in 1933, for a majority of THE LAST 65 YEARS, Democratic Houses of Representatives and Democratic Senates have CONTROLLED the nation and the President. A TOTAL of 38 Sessions with Democrats in CONTROL for 28 of those! WE need to inform/TELL our political representatives that WE NEED TO PASS a Constitutional Amendment for the LINE ITEM VETO. This will keep the SPECIAL INTEREST GARBAGE from being attached to valuable legislation. If Congress wants to give the president that power, they will have to pass a constitutional amendment, Supreme Justice John Paul Stevens said. "If there is to be a new procedure in which the president will play a different role in determining the text of what may become a law, such change must come not by legislation but through the amendment procedures set forth in Article V of the Constitution," Stevens said, on June 25th, 1998. IF your special interest is SO valuable, why do you have to HIDE it in valuable legislation? So, with them REFUSING to PASS the Line Item Veto, in reality, the House and Senate have REALLY been controlling the country!! AND, with the CURRENT Senate and Congress having the WORST approval rating in HISTORY, hopefully we will see a LOT of changes after the general elections. A recent Reuters poll is out and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have pulled an upset: They have managed to make George Walker Bush twice as popular as CONGRESS. RECENTLY - - JUST 13% of Likely Voters now say the DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED Congress is doing a good or excellent job. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 43% give Congress a poor rating. Those results represent a slight decrease from last month, when 15% gave Congress a good or excellent rating. Democrats generally believe in heavy fines for honest work, while rewarding sloth and indulgence. Do YOU think that people should be able to do absolutely nothing productive and get government hand-outs for sloth and indulgence - healthcare, tobacco, alcohol, drugs, STDs, etc. ?? Do YOU want to have YOUR MONEY TAKEN from YOU and YOUR FAMILY to FINANCE these people ??? .

It is pretty much why they lost control of the Congress in 2006 - because of voters like me, the fiscal conservatives - realized that in power, the Republicans were just like the Democrats - figuring they could spend their way into permanent incumbency.

They were wrong.

Im a staunch conservative and I am disgusted at Bush and the Republicans spending and increasing government and government entitlement programs.

And we dont even want to talk about their support for Amnesty!

This is not what true conservatives support.

Its a disgrace to Reagan Economic and Conservative principals.

They don't want smaller government. Everything they've done in this admnistration is the opposite of what a small government should be.

as another poster said, less regulation for the large corporations so that they can make their money with no one bothering them. the average citizen pays the price with loss of their freedoms and higher prices. then this administration wraps it all in an american flag.

now, that's one hell of a tasty sandwich.

Seems to me that they are in favor of protecting LARGE BUSINESSES from govt intrusion [aka regulation and oversight] but opposed to those measures that protect ordinary citizens from CORPORATE intrusion into their lives.

Conservatives who support Bush aren't supporting a true conservative.

Its all talk, just like the famiy values party, we will catch Osama dead or alive, etc.

It's all rhetoric.