[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Locke

No. Thats ridiculous.

I'd support good social programs if you could show me how they can be sustainably funded. If that requires Tax increases, then so be it. But show me that you're not just wasting the money, that its going to what they're saying its supposed to be going to.

If you want umpteen billions for schools and hospitals where do you expect the extra to come from for whatever your program-du-jour is?

I'm not going to be Judge, Jury and Executioner, but if you implement programs you can't fund then they're going to fail, so there needs to be more behind the concept than hopes, dreams and good feelings.

So what exactly is conservative about that?

Are non-conservatives capable of achieving this?
Have conservative politicians never presented a proposal they have no idea how to fund?

I take issue with the "Fiscally conservative" because it simply isn't a thing.
At the very least what you're describing isn't a thing that should be attributed to one side of the political spectrum or the other.

Neither Conservatives nor Liberals tend to follow that play book when it comes to getting elected, or running the show, so why do we give one side so much credit for some mythical thing we all love, but doesn't actually exist, and if it does, certainly isn't the sole possession of one party or political wing.