But how can we trust George Allen to cut spending if he's sent back to the Senate?
From her blog, GOP Senate Primary Candidate Jamie Radtke writes:
George Allen says when he was governor he ‘reined in’ government spending.
In fact, Allen endorsed $3.1 billion in additional general fund spending when he was governor: a 45.6% increase in spending. (Politifact, September 12, 2011)
When asked by Politifact about the difference between George Allen’s record as governor and Allen’s claim he ‘reined in spending,’ Allen’s own campaign manager tried to claim Allen never promised to cut the state budget, saying, “I can’t recall a single time when George Allen said he was going to cut the state budget.”
Then, as United States Senator, George Allen’s voted to increase the national debt by $3 trillion and increased federal spending by 46%.
Now, George Allen says if he’s returned to the Senate he’ll “rein in government spending” like he did as governor.
I suppose that under Senator Allen’s odd definition of “reining in government spending” he thinks he could increase federal spending by 45% and still be telling the truth. I don’t find that comforting at all.
Facts are stubborn things. But I'm sure Allen's close friends at Red State are probably looking for a way to help him spin his way of this.