Wednesday, October 03, 2007

P-Mac: A New Lefty?


But P-Mac cites a Wall Street Journal article to make a few points about the Republican Party.

The gist of the WSJ article is that the Republican Party is losing its business-person adherents. It cites the usual suspects: Big Auto, which wants Federal health coverage (although curiously, it does NOT mention Big Silicon--which has been yammering about this for years.) Then it cites the unhappy father who wants embryonic stem-cell research for his daughter's sake (not mentioning that a well-known Republican businessman from Green Bay pushed T. Thompson down that path with UW/Madistan several years ago).

Then it mentions the more conventional (and FAR more common) objection: GWB and his (R) pals in Congress have spent money just like the Democrats would have.

What we have here, in the first two examples, is the Case Against Fred Thompson, folks.

It's also called "rent-seeking."

Fred's Federalism (small central gummint, empowered States) is anathema to those who grew up as Boomers and who still think that The Great Society is the solution (albeit perhaps LBJ directed the money to all the wrong places...)

In other words, those (R) label folks are operating under an illusion. They are not Republicans.

They are, in fact, Democrats, who want the agenda tilted towards them, at the Federal level. But they contributed to (R) candidates and voted (R) because, really, folks, it was all about the money---that is, low taxes. For them.

Or special favors. For their companies. Or their chilluns (like jobs with FEMA).

P-Mac makes a couple of other points, and I will politely disagree with him (his new car is REALLY big and dangerous...)

First, on cultural issues, how valid was it to expect the Republicans to be the brand of business to begin with?

Actually, P-Mac, the populist-agrarian (R) tendency only began with Reagan. The Republicans inherited the Whigs (to a great extent) and were the "business Party" until roughly 1980.

Second, how exactly does a party whose franchise is being the free-market guys reconcile that with taking over health care or dramatically raising the level of regulation on behalf of global warming?

The (R) Party is not free-market. The (R) Party has always been the Fortune 50 at the polls--again, until Reagan, more or less. If it were free-market, Nixon would have NEVER been re-elected--or elected in the first damn place.

Third, can Republicans, given power, even restrain the growth of government?


OK, class, let's review: what's the difference between Republicans and Conservatives?

Conservatives don't cry to MamaFed, pulling on her teats. Instead, Conservatives don't trust MamaFed (except Defense--mostly.)

Conservatives understand the Leviathan of Hobbes, AND of Jonathan Swift.

And Conservatives now have P-Mac as a standard-bearer.

Welcome aboard!!


Pat McIlheran said...

I am thus educated. Gratia, Magister. Then again, my perspective's an understandable flaw: I started paying attention in high school, during the Carter administration.

Dad29 said...

Well, yeah, there's that 'generation-gap' thing. My actual education began before Carter was President (but long after HS and college..)

Be that as it may, you now have some perspective on the 'religious right's mutterings about Ruuudeeee!