Just in case you ever thought otherwise, it is very hard to take the red diapers off the baby, even when they 'grow up.'
So talk of small government may be music to conservative ears, but it’s not to the public as a whole. This isn’t to say the public is fond of big-government liberalism. It’s just that what’s politically vulnerable about big-government liberalism is more the liberalism than the big government. (Besides, the public knows that government’s not going to shrink much no matter who’s in power.)
Now it’s true that the size of the government and the modern liberal agenda are connected. It’s also true that modern conservatism has to include a strong commitment to limited (though energetic) government and to constitutional (though not necessarily small or weak) government. Still, there’s a difference between a conservatism that is concerned with limited and constitutional government and one that focuses on simply opposing big government
Personally, I always kinda thought that the 9th and 10th Amendments were there for a reason, and that the 14th has been abused beyond recognition.
But then, I'm not nearly as innnerleccckkkshullly smart as BillyBoy.
Just like the Citibank, and Lehman, and Bear, and GM folks, he has Hy-er Edju-ma-Kay-shun.
And there's plenty more destruction of this alleged "conservative" at the RedStates site, like this:
Let me reciprocate and rub Kristol’s nose in the fact that his idea of “big government conservatism” is being driven from office by the American people. He conveniently ignores that fact. He and his friends at the Weekly Standard have, for the longest time, championed the Bushies as the model — big government and conservative. Guess what? The American public isn’t buying it.
Let me also point out that Kristol’s be all, end all — the Presidency of John McCain — was rejected by the American people.
Unperturbed, both he and Brooks still want conservatives to throw the small government guys out of the party, or at least have them shut the hell up, while the public at large continues castrating and killing Kristol’s and Brook’s own team of big government liberals in sheep’s clothing.
By no co-incidence, BillyBoy is pushing Jeb Bush.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think it's probably cyclical to some degree. Back in 1980 people shared Reagan's opinion that the government wasn't the solution, it was the problem.
Today is different. People believe that the government should be doing something in certain areas--and that those efforts should be competent (something that's been missing over the last few years).
People aren't buying the idea that market forces will fix our health care system. And they don't like the idea of watching GM and Chrysler disappear. And they understand that having a sane policy with regard to current environmental challenges requires competent federal regulation.
The primary concern isn't whether it's going to cost money. Their primary concern is that the government do something and that it work.
Well, yah, competency....
You're wrong about "people" and the Big 3. Look at the polls, not your navel.
As to 'health care markets,' people do know KNOW what the markets are; hospitals have kept their prices secret (just like MD's), haven't they?
And finally, with few exceptions, the enviro-damages are a trade-off for affordable energy.
Yes, there must be some regulation; I like rational OSHA; but I do not like the currently irrational EEO stuff (e.g.)
I'm not thinking that having farmers pay for cow and pig farts qualifies as "sane policy with regard to current environmental challenges requires competent federal regulation"
Good stewardship of the earth is good, but the policies being pushed are just bat-sh*t crazy. And none of them will help provide a sound and affordable energy policy or food supply.
Post a Comment