For what it's worth, it wasn't meant as a slight to democrats, just a slightly less aggrandizing presentation of the point made.

Arguably, Republicans that claim to prefer a smaller government often would take the surplus from the cut of safety-net programs and apply them to the military. In practice, that may be fair, but it doesn't necessarily result in a smaller government either.

If I were critiquing both parties on effectiveness, I would easily fault the Republican party for failing to substantially reduce the size of government, while at the same time, I would critique democrats for settling for a reduced quantity of freedom in the interest of allowing everyone to share equally in the freedoms that remain.

That said, I prefer neither party, so feel free to critique however you see fit.

The phrase is being used in lieu of the specific and extensive arguments that would have to be made connecting business regulation, social safety nets and progressive taxation with marriage being defined as heterosexual, abortion restrictions, and war(?).