Yes, as you know spending is a sore spot with me as well. But if that's what you don't like, by all means give credit where credit is due. Our 'tax cut' came partly from a fiscally-reckless borrowing of $120 billion from social security last year, the biggest looting of SS in our history. To be fair Clinton did too, at 1/4 the rate and averaging about $35 billion a year. As for the 'spend' part of your statement, you fail to mention that Bush (hand in hand with our republican-led congress) is spending more money per year than any executive/legislative combo in history, and by a long-shot at that. There is no wiggle-room to argue otherwise, to the dismay of many traditional conservatives they've earned that distinction fair and square. No longer can a democratically controlled congress (as in Bush 41's case) share partial blame. If you really, truly are concerned with spending then this should be your biggest irk right now, not the possibilities of the 'tax and spend' democratic presidential hopeful, but the proven track record of our 'borrow and spend' encumbent.
Your statement above may have been appropriate in the past, like when Ike balanced the budget 50 years ago. Current overspending is an embarasssment, IMO. The numbers don't lie, but they do make slogans like the one quoted above look shakey at best, and short-cut one's ability to "see the forest through the trees" at worst.
BTW, I'm not politicing for Kerry as I'm not a democrat. I just grow weary of seeing the truth go out the window in lieu of fortune-cookie platitudes.