Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Where have all the conservatives gone?
www.worldnetdaily.com ^ | 6/22/2002 | Harry Browne

Posted on 11/08/2002 10:59:18 AM PST by winner45

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27868

Thursday, June 6, 2002


Harry Browne Harry Browne


Where have all the conservatives gone?


Posted: June 6, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Harry Browne


© 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

There used to be two highly vocal political movements in America – the conservatives and the liberals.

Although there were subtle variations, the basic difference between them was this:

  • Liberals were impatient with society as it was and wanted to use the force of government to change it.

  • Conservatives were skeptical of change, and were reluctant to use government to force changes on society.

Today, however, it's almost impossible to tell the two groups apart.

Liberals

The modus operandi of liberals has always been:

  1. Cite a social problem.

  2. Assume that this represents a failure of freedom that only the federal government can repair.

  3. Propose a big-government program.

  4. When someone objects, accuse him of ignoring the poor folks who are suffering.

  5. When the new program fails to solve the problem (and instead makes it much worse), throw more money at it, pass more laws, make the penalties more oppressive, and then ignore the situation (until it's time to cite the failure as a reason to expand the program again).

In this way they've turned education into a federal responsibility – leading to unsafe schools and far too many illiterate students.

They've ruined what was once the best health-care system in history – making it terribly expensive, cruelly insensitive, and totally out of the reach of many people.

They've created a permanent underclass of welfare clients, made America's farmers dependent on the federal government, and polluted the environment by putting too much land in the care of irresponsible bureaucrats.

No matter how much and how often and how harmfully government fails at what it does, no matter how many problems it causes, liberals still ask government to bring about whatever they want.

Conservatives

Conservatives used to oppose these government programs – fighting them with economic arguments, pointing to unintended consequences, and citing the unconstitutionality of the proposals.

But no longer.

Conservatives have used the federal government to wage a horrendous Drug War. The result has been drug-dealing gangs in the streets, children killed in drive-by shootings, crack babies, increased drug use, and a trashing of the Bill of Rights.

And how do they propose to deal with this enormous failure?

Throw more money at it, make the prison terms more oppressive, take away more of our civil liberties, trash the Constitution even further. In other words, do more of the things that created the problems.

If someone objects, accuse him of ignoring the crack babies and the families hurt by drugs.

If government schools are a mess, cite uneducated children as a reason for a government program to subsidize private schools – which will surely turn those schools into clones of the government schools (as happened with private colleges).

If federal welfare is a tragedy, propose putting religious charities on the federal dole – so that they, too, can become beggars at the government trough, doing the bureaucrats' bidding in order to keep the subsidies coming.

If it's revealed that our military, the FBI, or the CIA hasn't perform its mission properly, throw more money at it, expand whatever program has failed, give more power to the bureaucrats. And if anyone objects, if anyone cites the Constitution, just accuse him of ignoring the victims of 9-11.

No matter how much, and how often, and how harmfully government fails at what it does – no matter how many problems it causes – conservatives still ask government to bring about whatever they want.

No difference

In other words, conservatives now sound exactly like liberals.

  • Cite social problems as justification for expanding the federal government.

  • If anyone opposes the proposal, accuse him of being heartless or anti-American.

  • Ignore the Constitution if it conflicts with one's pet crusade.

  • And no matter how bad a program gets, the answer always is to make it bigger, more expensive, and more powerful.

What did you get for your vote?

Conservative writers and commentators oppose big-government programs only if they're proposed by Bill Clinton or some other Democratic president. Then they're constitutionalists – sounding the alarm against big government.

At least with Clinton, there was an opposition party. But with a Republican in the White House, there's no opposition. Thus government grew more rapidly under Nixon, Reagan, Ford or Bush than it did under Clinton.

In 2000, many people said they were voting for George Bush because he was the lesser of two evils.

But it turns out that Bush is doing all the things Gore would have done – only now, there's no opposition.

So it appears that those people who chose Bush actually voted for the greater of two evils – big government and no opposition.


SPECIAL OFFER!

If your retirement funds are vulnerable to market crashes, corporate scandals, wartime intrusions, or any other unexpected events, you need to make your investment portfolio bullet-proof. Harry Browne can help you do that. Just click here for information.


Harry Browne is the director of public policy at the American Liberty Foundation. You can read more of his articles and find out about his network radio show at HarryBrowne.org.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservative; liberal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
While demo vs. pubbie policy objectives differ somewhat, the modus operandi of the groups seems to differ little. Therefore, one can conclude that voting for either dems or pubs is like asking for more socialism.
1 posted on 11/08/2002 10:59:18 AM PST by winner45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: winner45
As a former stated Libertarian, a better question for you to ask Mr. Browne is: Where have all the Harry Browne supporters gone?
2 posted on 11/08/2002 11:04:03 AM PST by andrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: andrew
Maybe Harry should be asking where all his Al Queda buddies have gone?
3 posted on 11/08/2002 11:05:19 AM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: winner45
I predict no one will attempt to address the points made in the article.

Instead, attempts will be made to smear the author, and change the subject - liberal tactics to be sure - and by doing so just reinforce Browne's point.

4 posted on 11/08/2002 11:08:17 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: winner45
Yep, that all sounds 'bout right - but surely you realize you're just pissing in the wind here...
5 posted on 11/08/2002 11:08:45 AM PST by AntiGuv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: winner45
Welfare numbers are still dropping -- even with the economy sputtering... What does that say? It says conservative ideas work.
6 posted on 11/08/2002 11:10:39 AM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Prophetic. You could make a killing taking over for Miss Cleo.

I was right there with Harry up until he started in with the Clinton part. X42 may not have grown the government as much as others, but what he did do was even more irrepairable. Brady. Lewinsky. China.

Republicans no longer have an excuse. If they go back on their promises to reduce the size and scope of government, then they will have been shown to be the liars we suspect they are.

They have two years to make at least SOME meaningful changes, and the clock is ticking.

7 posted on 11/08/2002 11:16:01 AM PST by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: winner45
Conservatives could afford to be "skeptical of change" in the old days, maybe. But that hardly describes the position now. I agree that government should not be used to force social changes on people. But especially after the clinton years, especially a lot needs to be changed. But it can only be changed gradually, and only if the American people can be persuaded to go along with it.

There are many different kinds of conservatives. I'll agree that the Harry Browne conservatives are probably down to about 1%. You can't base a realistic political agenda on 1% support.
8 posted on 11/08/2002 11:23:18 AM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
If they go back on their promises to reduce the size and scope of government, then they will have been shown to be the liars we suspect they are.

Yup, the ball is in their court. Now it's time for them to put up or shut up about being for limited government.

Have you any predictions of what excuses will be offered when government not only doesn't shrink but gets even bigger, or do you think they'll just ignore the issue, and attack their critics?

9 posted on 11/08/2002 11:23:47 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: winner45
When Harry Browne can draw more voters than flies, I'll take him seriously.

What bothers me is not that Republicans and Democrats are "too alike". What I mourn is that too many of the Republicans we now have don't have the stones to stand up for conservatism. Hastert and Lott are shining examples of "Rodney King Republicans" (can't we all just get along?) - unwilling to draw a line in the sand when it needs to be drawn.

I miss Phil Gramm and Jesse Helms already.

Maybe as a full majority they will grow a backbone but I'm not holding my breath. If Harry Browne really cared about conservatism, he'd jettison the pot-smoking stoners that dominate his party and join with real conservatives like the Constitution Party. But I'm not holding my breath on that haapening either.

10 posted on 11/08/2002 11:27:40 AM PST by Tall_Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Republicans no longer have an excuse. If they go back on their promises to reduce the size and scope of government, then they will have been shown to be the liars we suspect they are.

Very true. But the real test is whether or not the die-hard GOP supporters still support the GOP after the government continues to expand, or whether they will make excuses ("they only have a simple majority, not a super-majority", "the democrats filibustered", "there's a war on, he had to expand the government", etc.).

And to be fair, those of us that doubt have to be ready to concede if the size of the government does shrink.

11 posted on 11/08/2002 11:44:02 AM PST by Cacophonous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: winner45
Republicans claim to be conservatives because they want to spend a few dollars less of my money than the Democrats. That makes them just slightly less liberal than Democrats, not conservative. As long as Republican voters are just as addicted to massive annual spending increases as Democrat voters, it's not surprising that Libertarian candidates get so few votes.
12 posted on 11/08/2002 11:57:01 AM PST by yoswif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
"The Liberals filibustered us!"

"The Polls said...."

"Regulations passed by previous administrations are holding us up and we are too gutless to change them ourselves."

"Starving puppies."

"Read my lips...."

"A thousand points of light..."

"Forging a New World Order..."

They've used them in the past. I guess we'll find out.

13 posted on 11/08/2002 12:00:15 PM PST by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cacophonous
These are all of the excuses that will be used. Now I am not a libertarian. I am a true conservative. I know that government will grow. The Pubbie party is no more conservative than the JFK was in his adminstration. Maybe that played partially in his demise. Bottom line. the people/persons that support these candidates are the elites & they determine the outcome. The players in this "two-party cartel" play a silly game & try to convince the sheeple of doing good intents. Don't forget what Alexander Tyler said about democracies.
14 posted on 11/08/2002 12:01:12 PM PST by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan
Aristotle. Galileo. Heck, I guess if you are aChristian you can even toss in Jesus.

Philosophers of tremendous merit are normally regarded in their own time as crack-pots, heretics, and criminals. While I don't know that Harry fits among such luminaries, the philosophy he espouses is such a "dangerous notion". Dangerous at least to those in power and their status quo.

I just hope that more people catch on to the message before the powers that be start shooting messangers.

15 posted on 11/08/2002 12:04:07 PM PST by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: winner45
...government grew more rapidly under Nixon, Reagan, Ford or Bush than it did under Clinton...

Your other points are well taken Mr. Browne. However, I would like to point a teeny tiny difference. Government grew more rapidly under Nixon, Reagan, Ford or Bush because of the DEMOCRAT controlled congress. We had deficit spending until the Repubs showed up. If you remember the first two years of Clinton, he pushed tax increases and tried to socialize America.

16 posted on 11/08/2002 12:07:23 PM PST by VRW Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cacophonous
I'm ready! Just ONCE, I'd love for our government to suprise me in a pleasent way.

Bold faced type. A double-helping of crow pie. Eat my own words. Admit I was a unfaithful dumbass.

In two years, assuming I haven't gotten sick of the admin's selective censorship policies, I'll start a thread with a bold type heading...

"I'M SORRY I DOUBTED YOU".

I'll even switch to a registered Republican.

No BS. I'm serious.

17 posted on 11/08/2002 12:08:27 PM PST by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: VRW Conspirator
No excuses this time. How confident are you?
18 posted on 11/08/2002 12:10:12 PM PST by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse; Cacophonous; freeeee
Did any of you vote for Republicans on Tuesday?

If you didn't, I don't see why those of us who did should give you the time of day.

19 posted on 11/08/2002 12:10:57 PM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: andrew
As a former stated Libertarian, a better question for you to ask Mr. Browne is: Where have all the Harry Browne supporters gone?

And what does Harry Browne know about what conservatives used to stand for?

20 posted on 11/08/2002 12:12:52 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson