Topping the Divided Government news last week was publication of Richard Viguerie’s new book, Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause. Viguerie's conservative credentials are unassailable, and he is often referred to as an architect of the Reagan Revolution. In this book he asks this very reasonable question "How can Bush, (Dennis) Hastert, (Bill) Frist and company look us in the eye and tell us they are fiscal conservatives when in five short years they increased the already-bloated government by more than the budget for the entire federal government when Ronald Reagan was assuming office?"
The answer is left to the reader as an extra credit homework assignment.
A number of bloggers took note, of the book, and a common thread was his comment on divided government:
Wally at A Defection to Reality posts a link to a World Net Daily article: Reagan architect declares war on GOP
Melissa Taylor at Blog it Up! posts It's time to wake up the GOP:
Viguerie says conservatives should not fear the loss of Congress in 2006, since the biggest gains usually follow a defeat. ...Viguerie helped transform American politics by pioneering the use of direct-mail fundraising in the political and ideological spheres. Dubbed by some as the "Funding Father of the conservative movement," Viguerie motivated millions of Americans to participate in politics for the first time. "If ever there was a case for divided government, here it is," writes Viguerie. "The lesson for many Americans is that today's Republicans cannot be trusted with the keys to both the executive and legislative branches of the federal government."
Mikey at Zero One posts Bush spending up 5 times more than Clinton:
Amen and Amen and Amen! Republicans need to wake up. Let me remind you, listen to any of Bush's state of the union speaches and you will hear a socialist speaking for at LEAST the first half of those speeches... Viguerie compares spending by the federal government, adjusted for inflation, during the Clinton years vs. the Bush years. In Clinton's first term, federal expenditures rose 4.7 percent. In his second term, they rose 3.7 percent. In the first term of the Bush administration, however, spending rose 19.2 percent. "If ever there was a case for divided government, here it is," writes Viguerie. "The lesson for many Americans is that today's Republicans cannot be trusted with the keys to both the executive and legislative branches of the federal government."
Other recent Divided Government posts from around the blogsphere.
Federal spending under the Bush administration has grown five times larger than that during the second term of the Clinton administration, charges a conservative Republican activist in a new book that paints the president as a traitor to his party... If ever there was a case for divided government, here it is,” writes Viguerie. “The lesson for many Americans is that today’s Republicans cannot be trusted with the keys to both the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.”
By Lee Cullum, KERA Commentator posts in - "Bayh-Warner"
McQ at the QandO blog posts Predicting the outcome of the ’06 midterms
The main argument Bayh-Warner could mount, however, is that even conservative economist Milton Friedman now says that divided government works better than turning it all over to the same party. He told Charlie Rose that he prefers a Republican in the White House and a Congress controlled by Democrats. But if the GOP still leads the House and Senate in 2008, then a plausible campaign could be waged for the importance of checks and balances in the Oval Office. No one could do that more effectively than Evan Bayh and Mark Warner.
DWSUWF was also noticed by a few more blogs last week:
Everything I've read says the House is definitely headed for a change. Can you say "Speaker Pelosi" (and from a strictly selfish blogging perspective, it would be wonderful)? And given my desire for a split Congress, the House in Dem hands is fine. They will, and I can almost promise this, self-destruct within the 2 years they have it prior to '08.... I'm of the opinion that the margins of loss are going to be much greater than the Republicans believe and that they are going to lose the House. But specifically I'm not ready, quite yet, to give the Senate to them. Like I said I want a divided Congress.
A Shining City posts in - An Excellent Blog:
Rebellion Coffee Posted in Libertarian News - Divided Government
Check out "Divided We Stand. United We Fall." This blog is right on target with its desire and push for a divided government. A divided government leads to gridlock and limits the power of the government as a whole (a very good thing in my mind). Plus, if you are a true conservative Republican you should vote for a Democrat this fall. Why? For the simple reason that if the Democrats take back part of the federal power the Republicans will have an incentive (or as true conservatives like to say "essentive") to act like good conservatives. It is a political thing! It is essential that the Democrats take control of at least one part of Congress (I am thinking that the House is most likely) this fall.
Glen Dean at Christian Libertarian posts in Divided We Stand/ United We Fall
... Republicans by defeating the big-spending RINOs, we could end up with two good outcomes: gridlock, and a Republican party chastened enough to both return to its roots and stop taking conservative and libertarian votes for granted. ...
"This guy is on to something."I knew I liked that Dean guy ...
Just Vote Divided.