Posted on 07/17/2008 6:43:31 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
Larry Hunter claims he is a "lifelong conservative." Yet, in his recent New York Daily News article, he also says he is voting for Barack Obama for president. The two simply cannot coexist. One has to be obliterated in favor of the other. And, regardless of the facile reasoning Hunter gives for his apostasy, this article does nothing to support any supposed conservative cause. It does, however, give the media something to crow about.
Larry Hunter begins by assuring us of his conservative credentials. A supply sider from the Reagan White House, Hunter had a 5-year-long stint as chief economist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was a member of Bob Dole's economic team for the 1996 presidential race and was chief economist for Jack Kemp's Empower America. All of this does confirm his economic conservatism. But none of it says anything to his ideology otherwise. Still, regardless, we can take at face value his credentials and mark him as generally on the right side of the issues.
Yet, even after telling us his resume, Hunter says, "This November, I'm voting for Barack Obama." Naturally, he says his "colleagues were shocked." So should be anyone who thinks conservatism the best direction for this country.
So, why is Larry Hunter voting for Barack Obama? It turns out he isn't voting "for" Barack Obama, he's voting against the Republican Party. And that is NOT a legitimate reason to mark the ballot for Obama. Hunter's "reasons" are ill considered, filled with petulance, and self-defeating to the ideology to which he insists he hews.
The answer is simple: Unjustified war and unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights vs. ill-conceived tax and economic policies - this is the difference between venial and mortal sins.
There is, of course, much room for honest debate on whether the war was justified or not. But that we are fairly in it regardless makes the debate of little interest in the contemporary decision making process. Hunter's second reason, the "unconstitutional abridgment of individual rights" is simply absurd. There have been no such abridgments. If Hunter means the reputed abridgment of the non existent rights of the terrorists, it is even more absurd. Additionally, when compared to the actions of past presidents in past wars, Bush's efforts seem wonderfully measured and moderate. But it is his last part that is most absurd, that of the "mortal sins" of bad economic policy. I am no fan of much of Bush's domestic policies, but to use these failures as an excuse to vote for a party that will institute socialist inspired policies that will make Bush's policies seem as if it was crafted by Joseph A. Schumpeter or Milton Friedman, well that simply makes no logical sense at all! It makes Larry Hunter appear as if he has taken leave of his senses.
Admittedly, what conservative isn't mad at the Bush administration? There really are but a handful of things Bush did well -- or at least stood on the right side of the issue over -- so no conservative has been happy since he took office. So-called "compassionate conservatism" was merely an excuse for big-goverment, no conservative denies that.
Additionally, few conservatives trust McCain to be much better. However, we can at least say that McCain has a lifelong aversion to raising taxes and is a consistent budget hawk. Certainly all a voter can base his vote on is the record, not the rhetoric and campaign promises, and McCain's economic record places him in the conservative camp. Obama's, on the other hand, is a socialist's record. There is nothing whatever conservative or even moderate about Barack Obama's actual voting record.
For an economist mad at the Bush administration's economic record and calling that record a "venal and mortal sin" because of its lack of conservative principle to then vote for a man who's record places him on the socialist side of the line is just plain foolish.
Read the rest of this in depth analysis at Publius' Forum ...
There are “conservatives” here on FR who may not for Obama, but their actions may get Obama elected.
But, he is getting his 15 minutes of fame. To many mental cases, that is the reward.
Or the Republican party's actions may.
I say:
Mr. Hunter, you fifteen minutes are now up.
A conservative voting FOR Obama? Looks like it’s all over now. Dang!
Just witness all the support here for Romney and McCain.
It gets crazier every day doesn’t it?
To put it quite simply, Larry Hunter is either an abject liar or needs a straight-jacket.
No honest conservative would ever pull the lever for a Marxist.
McCain has to get the Conservative vote the old fashioned way. ‘He has to earn it’. McCain’s ‘reaching out’ is no different than Obama’s ‘pandering’.
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2006/dec/14/20061214-080029-4604r/
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/06/snipe_hunting.html
Apparently, he was the lead staff person in charge of putting together the economic growth and tax cut component of the Contract With America.
I’m reading this as a R/C guy so totally PO’d with RINOs and Bush that he feels such a drastic measure is called for as a wake up call to the GOP.
Well, let’s see if he’s as vocal in his support of his conservative Senator or Representative or Governor as he is of Obama. If not, then I think we can conclude he’s lying about being a conservative!
If he is, well then maybe he’s just kind of dumb or has a grudge against McCain. THere are probably just as many Democrats on the other side voting for McCain just to spite Obama.
I can understand wanting McCain to lose but the cost is too great. Did the GOP and movement conservatives learn from 2006? No. They pushed Rudy, Romney and Huckabee, all liberals and then rallied around McCain.
Are the "Blue Dog" Democrats proponents of conservative values? Hardly! The first thing they did was elect Pelosi and Reid. They are a mixture of compulsive liars or Blue (proper term for female dogs) leashed by Pelosi. Even the DLC is now morbund. We have a Democrat Party to the left of 1972.
Given the great success of teaching a lesson in 2006, let us kill the country for such ideological success in the future!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.