The sorry fiscal record of a "conservative" administration

David Broder awakens from his slumber and types a few recognizable words.
===================================================================
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002191096_broder27.html

<snip>
The results are startling. Elementary and secondary education programs, including the president's No Child Left Behind initiative, would be cut by $11.5 billion over the next five years to stay within the caps, with the 2010 year alone seeing a 12-percent reduction from inflation-adjusted 2005 levels.

The WIC program, which subsidizes the diets of low-income pregnant women and nursing mothers — a major preventive measure against low-weight babies — would be cut by $658 million, enough to reduce coverage in 2010 by 660,000 women. Head Start funds would be reduced $3.3 billion over five years, with 118,000 fewer youngsters enrolled in 2010.

Clean-water and clean-air funding would decline by $6.4 billion over five years, a 20-percent cut in 2010. Community-development programs used by cities to build up impoverished neighborhoods would lose $9.2 billion in five years, a 36-percent cut in 2010.

Most of these cuts would come out of state and local budgets, adding to the burdens their taxpayers would have to take up if services are to be maintained

You're never gonna win this PR battle this way. We need to drag out every analogy for spendthrift under the son, choose an expecially nasty one or two to pair with the adjective "irresponsible Republicon," and hammer them home relentlessly.

NGU.

for that term to take hold. I think it has a good ring. It's a good, simple statement with which they can't argue.

Repub: "They'll raise your taxes."
Dem: "They already raised taxes on your children tremendously, because of the fiscal crisis they created."

funds in Iraq and total unaccountability of expenditure of funds associated therewith.