Deficit reduction?

Speaking of ridiculous, from the Washington Post:

Bush's budget, which is only a blueprint for Congress to follow or ignore, proposes reducing health care programs, farm subsides and scores of other programs but produces only minimal, if any, deficit reduction next year.

However, the Post apparently has a soul on this issue

In a broad economic speech touching on issues including tax cuts and trade, Bush said Congress has a responsibility to confront long-term financial problems facing America, such as the solvency of Social Security. But his budget does not account for the huge costs of creating personal Social Security accounts, making permanent the tax cuts enacted over the past four years and continuing the war in Iraq.

(emphasis added)

It's funny how Bush enjoys following the starve the beast model of conservative rule, yet somehow still manages to come up way over budget fiscal year after fiscal year. It's even funnier how the rest of the conservatives fawn over him, apparently suddenly unconcerned about the 'fiscal responsibility' they and their party have continued to lose a hold upon over the past few decades.

Can I really fault them, though? They unite behind their president much as we (progressives, liberals, democrats...smart people) were behind a very flawed, pro-Iraq war Kerry.

Dean may have been a lot of things, but pro-war and fiscally irresponsible he was not. I did not throw my support behind Dean in the primaries, mainly because I didn't know enough about him, but retrospectively, I'm disappointed by his loss. I truly feel as though he may very well have stood a better chance against the Republican Noise Machine than Kerry. Aside from his early anti-war stance, he's a better, more passionate speaker, can much more easily articulate his points, and would have been harder to tag as a rich northeastern liberal. Now, yes, he is a rich northeastern liberal, but his background as a doctor may have been more appropriate than Kerry's 'career politician, silver spoon' label.

Dean's run as chairman should be a step in the right direction. His status as a reform Democrat, and his belief in the decentralization of the party to the state and local level should prove prosperous. There is without a doubt a continued movement from Dean's candidacy, and having him as the new chairman represents an overturn in the party from within. While some of the big donors used to the old ways of the party may be turned off, I am confident that the new machine will run as smoothly, if not more smoothly, than the McAuliffe years. I read a study showing that over 20% of the Democratic party donated to the committee this year, representing something like a three-fold increase from the previous presidential cycle. And, most of these were from donors giving less than $100. These people are new to the political game, new to donating, and new to the progressive cause, at least an organized one. If we can utilize our power, from the 'netroots' to the streets, and actually figure out a proper use for blogs, internet technology, and the traditional campaign styles, we'll be on our way...big if I guess...I'll be working on it, whether employed by the party or someone else.