Most of the rise in Federal spending under Reagan was in nominal dollars. As you recall, inflation was quite high back then, so the Federal budget had to increase just to maintain a level amount of inflation-adjusted spending.

For example, in 1982, Federal spending increased 10%. But so did inflation that year. So the inflation-adjusted rate of increase was about ZERO.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/55More.htm

On the other hand:

Bush 43 was a disaster for fiscal conservatism. Medicare Part D was a disaster.

You won’t find RedState.com or the Tea Party movement defending Bush’s domestic record. They supported Bush because of the War on Terror, and because of their natural desire to protect a socially conservative president from the bitter attacks coming from the Left.

Easy answer, greek boy. They were sitting at home, angry and disorganized, not yet coalesced into a powerful, influential movement.

Karl Rove, in his new best selling book, has a chapter on these conservatives who did indeed sit home and not come out in vote for W in 2004 because of the very reason you mention –deficits and federal spending. They liked W’s tax cuts but really wanted spending reigned in as well and W didn’t do that, what with 3 wars to fight.

Greek boy continues: “Or did they organize because the president is a black,liberal, Democrat?” Hey, there’s a good little democrat farLeft activist for you –play that race card with some spite? Race-bait much, greek boy?

The TP Movement organized because Obama and the Obami are mostly socialists, if not collectivists, pushing their agenda upon a majority of Americans who still think of themselves as center-Right people. It has nothing to do with race. Heck, they even used the makeup from Heath Ledger’s joker character and didn’t blacken-up Obama’s mixed race cocoa skin for better contrast. What do you want?

By the way, the only brownshirts these days are the Obami Chicago Thug Machine goons playing fast & loose with the truth –and the political lives of about 40 once-safe-4-reelection Democrats.

But for someone who race baits like you, I guess misusing a term like brownshirt is all in a day’s worship, right?

LFC Says:
“And still we have not one idea of what substantive things the Tea Party is actually FOR. They want low taxes and less government, but we can’t touch defense spending, Social Security, or Medicare, and debt payments can’t be touched, so that leaves … what exactly?

If they want to be taken seriously, they have to start proposing some beliefs that add up.”

I think you hit on a good point. I am personally interested in how the Tea Party movement will try to reconcile the desire to cut spending, with the intent to keep at least some of the programs that they benefit from.

This is where I think that surveys such as the recent FrumForum Tea Party survey could be useful. Do Tea Party Movement members think there is more waste and “corruption” (in the broadest sense of the term) then there are entitlements? How many of them consider entitlements to be a form of “waste”? Does age affect these perspectives?

After all, it’s not clear how many Tea Party members are aware of what would happen to them if the Paul Ryan budget was made law tomorrow.

It seemed fitting to tag these ObamaBots as a collective Obami. It got started when the Democrats gave in to the Obami in Denver and built the fake greek temple of worship… and then we had the most expensive Inaugural ever for the most pompous 1st Family ever… hey, when the Democrats only get to do those once a decade, I get they need to splurge and make it memorable –even if most of America was deep in a recession and families were losing their homes faster than the Obami can hire lobbyists into the WH.

Thanks for the lesson in latin –had 4 yrs of it in Catholic high school.

“Your guy, Obama, and all the Obami have gotten away for over 20 months of campaigns and governing proposing all kinds of “beliefs” about HC reform that never, ever add up.”

A Latin plural would be “Obamae” as in agenda/agendae. Perhaps you are thinking of Octopus/Octopi.