Richard Reid, freedom fighter in defense of Constitutional principles
Posted on 04/18/2002 5:43:33 AM PDT by Commie Basher
Two weeks ago, I suggested that George Bush's presidency had turned out to be amazingly similar to what we had feared from Al Gore. The only major difference is that there's very little conservative opposition to Bush's expansion of government, while we could have expected fierce opposition to Gore.
The article provoked some angry reactions from people who said that only a fool could fail to notice all the good deeds George Bush has done.
The Bush agenda:
Not wanting to be a fool, I've compiled a list of the good things conservatives believe George Bush has achieved so far. Let's look at them:
He opposed the Kyoto agreement on global warming, while Al Gore supported it. But since the Senate had already rejected the treaty, it doesn't matter what the president thinks about it.
He's said he wants to cancel the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty so the U.S. can build a missile defense. All well and good. But he hasn't done anything to get America out of the treaty or to protect us from missile attack, beyond what Bill Clinton had already done. So far, it's just talk.
He hasn't signed a bill imposing new gun restrictions. But, then, Congress hasn't passed such a bill, so we don't know what he'll do when the test comes. But he's already proposed closing "loopholes" in the unconstitutional gun laws already on the books. And given the way he's embraced foreign aid, campaign-finance reform, federal health care and practically everything else, why should we assume he won't sign the next gun-control bill? (He signed many such bills in Texas.)
Bush and Gore make opposing public statements on abortion. But just as Bill Clinton did nothing to promote abortion, so George Bush has done nothing to reduce abortions.
On Social Security, Bush has talked about wanting to let you invest a teensy bit of what now goes down the Social Security drain. But he has sent no specific proposal to Congress. Even if Congress would turn it down, shouldn't Bush at least make the Democrats publicly oppose your right to invest your own earnings?
Al Gore probably wouldn't have pushed through a tax cut as Bush did. In my view, a tax cut without a spending cut means only that the monstrous burden of big government is being rearranged – not reduced. But since others may see the issue differently, this matter is at least debatable. However, even here Bush discarded some of the provisions he had labeled essential – such as tax relief for corporations.
Perhaps Al Gore wouldn't have handled the terrorist situation as Bush has. But we don't know what Gore would have done. Prior to Sept. 11, we didn't know how Bush would have handled such a crisis. In fact, he's already reversed some of his earlier promises – such as not imposing pro-American governments on foreign countries.
The scorecard:
In sum, George Bush seems very good on things that don't count – gun bills he hasn't had to veto, environmental treaties that won't be enacted anyway, talking about the ABM treaty or reforming Social Security while doing nothing about them.
But where something has actually happened – foreign aid, farm subsidies, education, health care, campaign-finance reform, corporate welfare, and much more – he's expanding government at a blinding pace, just as Al Gore probably would have done.
And I doubt that Gore would have signed a punitive tariff on foreign steel – which could trigger a terrible trade war and injure the economy.
Who's to blame?
Am I carping at George Bush?
No, I'm carping at the conservatives who would have been screaming bloody murder if Al Gore were president and had done exactly what George Bush has done.
Conservatives don't oppose Bush because he's a Republican. For most Democrats and Republicans, it's all just a game – "beat the other team, whatever it takes."
If all you want is a president who will say what you want to hear, George Bush is your man. But if you want a president who actually does something to make your life better and reduce the government to its constitutional limits, you're no better off with Bush than with Gore.
Sorry, but that's the way it is.
Raise your sights
They tell you that in politics you must compromise. But all the compromises have been in the direction of bigger and more oppressive government. There are never any compromises in our favor – producing smaller reductions than we might want.
If you don't ask for what you want – if you don't demand what you want as the price of your support – you shouldn't be surprised that you never get what you really want.
When are you going to raise your sights – and stop supporting those who are selling out your few remaining liberties?
The old, ugly, scowling, and embittered spinster with the humpback and warts can always blame her lifelong loneliness on the low tastes of males.
The Libertarian Party is strictly self-marginalized. After 911, let's hear their ideologue platform calling for unlimited immigration and the supposed 'right' of people to carry C4 plastic explosives in their sneakers, and they'll go from 1/2 a percent to 1/100th of a percent.
Whether it's marginalized or not, the Libertarian Party has a major problem: it cannot remain true to its ideology in cases where there is not a general agreement among the people -- not only about the roles or limits of government, but also about morality.
Beyond that, you're right. There is indeed a strong tendency for libertarians to self-marginalize by defending behaviors that are harmful to the greater community (which libertarians often claim do not exist).
Take a beat, have a cocktail.
Why are you so angry? Do you feel threatened?
Or are you just afraid that there might be some truth
out here that doesn't fit into your narrow view?
I hope you have a nice evening.
Best wishes
you said, let's hear their ideologue platform calling for unlimited immigration and the supposed 'right' of people to carry C4 plastic explosives in their sneakers,
You should be a speech writer for the democrats.
Their usual tactic is to exaggerate, distort and lie. Well done!
Good luck in your new carreer
How about posting some examples to show us how inconsistant we are?
Thanks in advance.
Excellent point.
So, what are YOU doing about it?
Yes I am.
Everyone can understand this sort of hostility; stop pretending that your implacable hatred has anything to do with ISSUES!
Which is why we should not put so much effort into shouting our opposition to the WOD from the rooftops.
Instead, let's characterize it as opposition to uncontititutional laws. It's the truth. The effect's the same. And we dodge the "doper" stigma.
And not even then. Keep voting LP.
LOL! I have no hatred for anyone or anything except sin. Politics isn't even my battlefield. It wouldn't matter that there were Democrats or Greens or Trotskyite Spartacist League members squatting here. My arguments against them would still be much the same as they are against the Libertarians, as I am against moral-liberalism, not any particular fringe Party or ideology.
That's why I wouldn't even mention drugs.
Isn't it funny how there are so many "conservatives" on FR who claim to love limited Constitutional government will argue for weeks that the Constitution allows the WOD? If you point out that a Constitutional Amendment was required to ban alcohol, they say that that's different. How it is different, they never explain.
Some will even make the "living document" or "times are different" arguments. Arguments that they reject when applied to abortion or the 2d Amendment.
Frankly, I believe the only hope for liberty is the younger generation. Older folks are mostly kneedeep in socialist shibboleths of various kinds.
Telling it straight on the b*llsh*t drug laws is ONE way of having some semblance of credibility with younger folks, who, despite the years of gubmint agitprop in the skools, laugh out loud at the official lies.
Laughing at lies is a very good place to start building an actual majority of voters who support liberty.
FDR-loving Democrats and Republicans are dying off; it's not worth the effort to convert them to Constitutionalism.
Speaking truth to the currently powerless is THE best way to build a future majority.
That's why I love to participate on the WOD threads, even if, intellectually, it is the equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel.
Socialism is the enemy; love of liberty is the only force that can destroy it.
I don't give a rat's *ss about Party; I only care about victory over modern Totalitarianism.
Fighting the WOD is the best way to accomplish this, IMNSHO.
I think I now have a better grasp of where you're coming from.
As you know, we ARE on the same side of a number of issues--just not on the WOD issue.
In my view, you are extremely mistaken in your moral judgment in this matter.
Cheers.
-- 'This new cultural jihad I advocate is aimed against your ideology, -- its not personal.'
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.