text: fiscally responsible - smaller government? david walker, the head of the government accountability office, official bookkeeper for congress, said at a briefing last week that the $760 billion accrual deficit "amounts to $156,000 of debt for every man, woman and child in america. for a family, it's like having a $750,000 mortgage -- and no house."  are you kidding me?  can republicans actually run as the "conservative" party?  not "tax and spend" or even "borrow and spend".  it's like a 16 year-old spolied brat with a credit card.  anyone know why the gop is supposedly known for being for smaller government? both parties are prone to overspending because of the nature of our political system. however, the bush era has certainly made it difficult for a rational person to see the republicans as fiscally conservative.  i guess as long as they try to keep taxes low and disregard the impact on the deficit, they think they are conservative. they can still point their fingers at the "tax and spend" liberals who want to have a better balance between revenues and expenditures. for my money, i'd rather raise taxes than run up the kind of deficit we now have. it's also the case that republicans in general do not mind spending on the military and on corporate aid. they just don't like the evil "social" programs. objectively, the rich have gotten richer during bush's reign, and that seems quite okay with the republicans.