The problem with “small government” conservatives…
…is that (unless you push your produce to market down rutted dirt paths in some godforsaken corner of Kent County) EVERYONE depends on the government in some way or another.
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.
Which is why we’re called “small” government conservatives and not “no” government conservatives.
Would you prefer this it explains why big government conservatism scares me very much- this is from the CATO institute website:
Before the New Hampshire primary, McCain was at it again. Speaking to an audience in New Hampshire on January 3, one questioner remarked with concern that the current president has spoken about staying in Iraq for 50 years. How, the questioner wondered, did Senator McCain feel about this? Before the man had a chance to finish his question, McCain interrupted him, blurting out “make it 100 [years]! … That would be fine with me!”
It was a stunning, candid admission. If elected, McCain acknowledges that his policies would help ensure that when our grandchildren sign up for military service, some of them will deploy to Iraq. More broadly than Iraq, Senator McCain has a clear track record of supporting war and militarism, and if elected, there’s every reason–from his twitchy statements on the campaign trail to his actions in Congress–to believe that Senator McCain is the all-war-all-the-time candidate.
In the past decade, Senator McCain has supported unsheathing the saber against a variety of enemies from Serbia to Iraq, Iran, and Sudan. And in the present, as Matt Welch writes in his new book The Myth of a Maverick, the senator from Arizona “envisions a more militaristic foreign policy than any U.S. president in a century.”
In fact, Senator McCain has indicated that not only would he like to unleash the U.S. military on substantial portions of the rest of the world, as president, he would work to militarize American society. In a 2001 article in the Washington Monthly, after lamenting that it was “not currently politically practical to revive the draft,” McCain went on to praise and argue for the expansion of the National Civilian Community Corps, a federally-administered program where volunteers “wear uniforms, work in teams, learn public speaking skills, and gather together for daily calisthenics, often in highly public places such as in front of city hall.”
McCain glowed at the fact that the participants “not only wear uniforms and work in teams…but actually live together in barracks on former military bases.” There is already a place where young people wear federal uniforms, live in military barracks, and gather for calisthenics in front of government buildings: It’s called North Korea.
fsp,
which is why you supported Bush for 7 years too right?….
Speaking of supporting Bush, DonV, here is what Chris at the Cato Institute sent today concerning the federal budget:
“The new budget tops off eight years of remarkably spendthrift policies by President Bush. Over eight years, Bush has presided over a huge 67 percent increase in total federal outlays. The comparable figure for President Clinton’s eight years was just 32 percent.”
But seriously, there is really no reason why a small efficent government does not work just as well as a larger government. In fact you will find that you save money for yourself and there is more to go around for things. You just have to ensure that you have the right people doing the right kinds of jobs. It was a small government that created the United States, it was a smaller government that kept us safe until World War I. So there is inherently no reason why a big government works better. But it all depends on the economic system the government chooses to use. If it picks Keynesian economics government grows typically for social goods, if it picks a military Keynesian government it grows the military and is an all-war-all-the-time state; if it follows the rule of law as set out for us in the constitution it seems to work quiote well for everybody. That is what many people just do not seem to get today. I understand why we would feel that way, we have never in our young lives lived with a small government so the idea sounds foreign. And since it does not regulate it prevents government from imposing any technolgy on you, while at the same time encouraging all kinds of innovation and scientific development in the private sector.
When Republicans talk “small government” it is code for cutting the little bit of money that goes to programs that help people and adding to the big money programs that help large mulit-national corporations.
“which is why you supported Bush for 7 years too right?”
Touché
“When Republicans talk “small government” it is code for cutting the little bit of money that goes to programs that help people and adding to the big money programs that help large mulit-national corporations.”
Amen.
Big government isn’t anything the GOP really detests. It’s something they run for office on. Big difference.
“When Republicans talk “small government” it is code for cutting the little bit of money that goes to programs that help people and adding to the big money programs that help large mulit-national corporations.”
Jason,
That’s facile and cut and lots of DL readers will love it, but every political group has its little code words to restate or even hide its agenda.
When Democrats talk about “targeted tax cuts” they generally mean sending money to people who don’t make enough to pay taxes in the first place. The practice may or may not be ethical or necessary in any given case, but you can’t give a tax cut to someone who doesn’t pay a tax.
The sad modern truth is that we’ve all become political language whores; if I ran the zoo the firs thing I’d do is prohibit the naming of laws. No more “Clear Skies Initiative” or “Leave no teacher standing” or “Campaign reform”–just SB ### or public law ###.
“When Democrats talk about “targeted tax cuts” they generally mean sending money to people who don’t make enough to pay taxes in the first place”
Proof?
If it was up to me taxes would be a thing of the past. They burden all of us. And that money could be used to feed our families.
If there were no taxes I wouldn’t need any money, me and my buddies would just take your food.
Touche anon!
Brian said: It was a small government that created the United States, it was a smaller government that kept us safe until World War I.
No, it was the freaking oceans. Geez.
If there were no taxes we wouldnt be driving on decent highways, have decent schools, etc, etc. Course the repukes hate anything to do with “giving hard working americans who make little money for the hard work they do” a hand up. and now we have McMad taking a page right out of the Bushite playbook….Mr. McBush now wants to privatize social security again….an old dinosaur who obviously learned nothing from the Bush years.
The “small government” lunatic fringe actually believe all government should do is “have a military”, other than that, you’re on your own. Imagine this country after WW2, if we had no GI Bill, giving our soldiers the right to go to college get educated and build this country. The repukes hate anything that “helps” the little guy, cuz they only believe in the richest of the rich having it all…
The problem with repukes is, they only care for children until their born…they forget them until they are of age to be good soldiers to fight for corporations, and then could care less about them when elderly….useless eaters.