This graduate thesis provides a comparative analysis of the rhetorical affinity of conservative parties, in the North American context, to the principles of fiscal conservatism one the one hand and their budgetary policies on the other. The comparative analysis was conducted for the Republican Party of the United States and the Conservative Party of Canada. Both party politics were analyzed on their respective federal levels. The comparative analysis was conducted in the time period of the Clinton and Bush administrations in the case of the United States (1996 - 2009) and the administrations of Paul Martin and Stephen Harper in the case of Canada (2003 - 2015). The opposition rhetoric of the parliamentary representatives of the aforementioned parties was analyzed during the time period of the Clinton and Martin administrations. The findings were then compared to the fiscal policies implemented during the subsequent George W. Bush and Stephen Harper administrations. The results of the comparative analysis indicate that there indeed exists a significant level of discrepancy between the rhetorical affinity towards fiscal conservatism displayed by the aforementioned conservative parliamentarians on the one hand and the fiscal policies implemented by the analyzed conservative governments on the other. The results of the analysis further demonstrate that this disparity significantly tilts in favor of a stronger affinity for fiscal conservatism in the rhetoric of the aforementioned parliamentary representatives as opposed to the fiscal policies of the analyzed conservative administrations. An inter-case comparison of the American and Canadian examples further indicate that this discrepancy is more pronounced in the case of the United States while the Canadian case displays lesser but still significant disparities.