This Washington Times article refers to House Majority Leager Tom DeLay‘s recent comments regarding the Bush Administration’s record on government spending:

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said yesterday that Republicans have done so well in cutting spending that he declared an “ongoing victory,” and said there is simply no fat left to cut in the federal budget.
Mr. DeLay was defending Republicans’ choice to borrow money and add to this year’s expected $331 billion deficit to pay for Hurricane Katrina relief. Some Republicans have said Congress should make cuts in other areas, but Mr. DeLay said that doesn’t seem possible.

On the contrary, the Bush Administration compares poorly with past administrations in terms of cutting non-defense governmental spending, approved outrageous and poorly-administered pork barrel spending, ushered in a huge unfunded increase in the government’s future liabilities through the Medicare prescription drug benefit package, and has arguably presided over the biggest and most reckless deterioration of America’s finances in history.
In what parallel universe is Mr. DeLay operating?
Hat tip to Arnold Kling for the link to the Washington Times article.

Sometimes I am left to scratch my head and ponder whether there is any adult supervision left in Washington, D.C. these days. The latest incident giving me pause is the disclosure that Senate Democrats have designated John W. Dean III as a potential witness today during Judge John Roberts‘ confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Now, most of us older bloggers know all about John Dean, but younger folks might not. Mr. Dean is the convicted felon who somehow crafted his legacy of breaching the attorney-client privilege and testifying to Congress against his client (former President Richard M. Nixon) during the Watergate Scandal in the early 1970’s into a job as an “expert” legal commentator for FindLaw.com. An example of his “scholarship” is this article in which he took the dubious position that Senator John Kerry would have a pretty good defamation claim against Swift Boat veteran John O’Neill, who is a longtime and well-regarded Houston attorney.
Recently, Mr. Dean has been writing articles on FindLaw.com opposing the confirmation of Judge Roberts and contending that the White House should release Mr. Roberts’ documents from his time in the Solicitor General’s office during the 1980’s. Unfortunately for Mr. Dean, every Soliciter General in recent memory has taken the position publicly that such documents are covered by the attorney-client privilege and should remain confidential.
So, rather than rely on the advice of previous Solicitor Generals, the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee tap a convicted felon who violated the attorney-client privilege during the Watergate hearings to testify that the privilege should be violated again with regard to Judge Roberts’ work on behalf of the Solicitor General.
What on earth are these people thinking?