10.05.2005

Not the party of Reagan

Theres and handsome devil!I’ve been amazed at the effect the Harriet Miers nomination has had on Republicans. It’s not that her being confirmed or rejected is that big of deal but instead it seems like the last straw for conservatives who have put up with unprecedented increases in entitlement spending and gutless leadership. While Bush has pursued the war on terror with a determination not seen since Truman virtually everything else he’s done has left conservatives wanting. Real conservatives don’t want their cake and eat it too. The Bush tax cuts made us happy but he followed them up with a god awful prescription drug benefit entitlement. The reconstruction, military response in Afghanistan, and economic stimulus after 9-11 was followed by more tax cuts and “No Child Left Behind”. After the “It’ll cost what It costs” comment from Bush after Katrina I think conservatives went into insulin shock and this horrible SCOTUS pick snapped them out of it.
I grew up being serenaded by benefactors of the Johnson welfare state blaming Reagan for consigning them to starvation and ridiculous TV movies about being homeless and getting no help from the Government. Nothing says spending cuts like a ketchup sandwich. It was glorious. When Bush was elected I dreamed of long nights watching cable news laughing at the strained arguments Democrats would make for why the cut of a certain block grant or entitlement DOOMED!! their favorite victim group. Well we’re now in the 5th year and I haven’t once seen Bush called “heartless” 1/100th as much as Ronnie or even Newt Gingrich. Welfare reform under Clinton was the closest thing I’ve had and that’s pathetic.
The sad thing is that we can’t even wish we voted for the other guy (or party) because they’re even more pathetic. They’re just like that cloying guy that’ll say anything to get in a girls pants (See Stiffler in American Pie/American Wedding). For as good as Andrew Sullivan feels telling conservatives “I told you so” about Bush, at some level he must be relieved that Kerry wasn’t elected. He would have been an utter disaster.

Don’t agree? Watch.

Now I’m just looking forward to 2008. Hopefully we get a do over with McCain (or Condi).


UPDATE: Ugh. This is just nausiating.

Posted by Anonymous at 10:43 PM

2 comments:

Ben said...

Great post Andrew. I'll try to put more up here later, but I've been quite impressed with the discussion that has been emerging from the libertarian faction of the Republican party. In my opinion some of the best discussion has come from the usual suspects; Instapundit, Andrew Sullivan, Belgravia Dispatch and the like, but even National Review seems to be getting into it. It seems that the Miers nomination has really been the straw that broke the camel's back.

3:03 PM
Joe said...

I would be one of those adorers of the welfare state (I don't think it's wining to want elderly people to be able to afford medicine.) But the left and the right can agree on one thing; defecits DO matter. It's not that it's bad to run on the margins. If the resulting growth from government expenditures can outpace the defecit level, it's sustainable to run defecits. But we have deep, structural defecits that are already undermining confidence in the dollar, defecits that we're financing through loans, not expanded growth. I'd like to see us start a few fewer wars and raise taxes on rich people to pay for it rather than cutting taxes and cutting entitlement programs. Americans pay about 30% of their income in taxes (20% federal, 10% state and local). How much lower can we get and still expect effective governance?
The standard economic package for growth is to cut taxes and increase expenditures, which is good policy during a downturn. But those are "stimulus" policies, designed to be a kick in the ass, not permanent measures. At some point (and granted, we're still a good distance from this point) the debt becomes unmanageable.

11:23 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)