Remembering 1994...

Mentioning the year 1994 to a Democrat is the equivalent of asking a conservative what they think about gay marriage. That's the year the GOP took over Congress, gaining over 50 seats in the House alone. In a pevious post, I said that the House GOP have betrayed their own principles by becoming what they despised during 40 years of Democratic Hose rule: a majority who prefers self-perpetuation over real reform. I mentioned how the House GOP changed their own rules to allow Tom DeLay to keep his leadership post in case he gets indicted for some funny business in Texas.

I read an article in Slate that explains this pattern of hypocrisy better than my unqiue writing style ever could. The House GOP is clearly a group more interested in perpetuating their own rule as evicenced how many of the reforms in it instituted in 1994 have been repealed or weakened. These include term limits for the Speaker of the House and committee chairmen, and bans on corporate junkets and lobbyist-paid meals. The article also points out how these jokers have become ideological traitors that have foresaken the priciples that got them elected in the 1st place.

When I wrote about this eariler, I used the example of the stalled intelligence reform bill to illustrate this corrution. The article in Slate uses the example of wasteful spending. I posted earlier how blue states are subsidizing red states, but I want to make a different point here. The issue of fiscal resonsility is a term that associates itself w/ Republicans more than Dems. This is puzzling b/c Bill Cinton, a Democratic President, balanced the budget, lowered government spending, & lowered taxes more times than Ronald Reagan. Meanwhile, the last Republican adminstation to balance the budget was friggin' Eisenhower. Currently, the House Republicans pass more wasteful spending than their Democratic predecessors ever did & don't get called on it. You may argue on the value of what Clinton spent money on, but at least he actually paid for it. Meanwhile, Congress is spending money, as John McCain puts it, like a "drunken sailor."

Although I admit to being socially liberal/progressive, I'm actually a fiscal moderate. I believe that money should be spent on social programs b/c I believe they're important for a better society. But, I'm solidly against pork-barrel spending that goes to helping no one. What it now means to be a a so-called fiscal "liberal" is defined by pragmatic spending, balanced budgets, & less government (i.e., "Clintonomics"). What's going on now is wasteful & apalling for the lack of accountability.

In 1994, I didn't agree w/ Gingrich & his crew. I still don't agree w/ them, but at least they did actually change how Congress was run. I'll let you decide for better or worse. But, everything has come full circle & these self-puported "revolutionaries" have become even worse than their predecessors. Last time a party became too concerned about self-perpetuation, they got ousted. I don't know if 2006 can be a Democratic 1994. The Dems will need to be bold & idelaistic again to accoplish the same feat. (Personally, I think it's unlikely b/c the GOP has monoplized the use of "God" in politics to insulate themselves from criticism on job performance) But, majorities usually come to an end b/c they die from within. If I were a conservative, I'd do some soul-seaching right about now. Forunately, for Dems, conservatives aren't exactly good at self-reflection or admitting their own mistakes.