I feel like I need to expand on a few points from yesterday’s post.
First, I would like to be clear about what I liked about the Republican Party in the first place.
- Fewer government programs
- Lower taxes/less government spending
- Parents’ rights in education
- Personal responsibility
- Personal freedoms
- Tough on crime
- Gun rights
- Term limits
Next, I would like to be clear about what the Republican Party has become.
- Expand government, add new programs
- Cut taxes, yet increase spending and create deficits
- Expand Federal Government role in education
- Scaling back personal freedom
- Expansion of Federal Government role over the States
- Willing to betray principles to stay in power
An anonymous commenter on that post described my mindset as, “I don’t agree with a candidate on a single issue so they don’t belong in the same party as me.”
This is not about a single issue.
This is about the fact that the Republican Party has expanded the role of the federal government and increased government spending.
Spending under President Bush has increased at twice the rate it did under President Clinton. The Republican apologists (along with the anti-war crowd) would like us to believe that the spending is all due to military and post-9/11 budget items. This is not so.
Non-defense, non-homeland security, non-Hurricane Katrina discretionary spending has increased 22% (after adjusting for inflation) from 2001-2005.
The Republican Party no longer represents fiscal responsibility.
The No Child Left Behind Act dramatically increased the federal government’s control over local educational decisions. By doing so, they also caused an increase in federal education spending of 100% from 2001-2005 ($35 billion to $70 billion).
The Republican Party no longer represents smaller government.
One part of your characterization of my mindset was accurate, Mr. Anonymous. I do not belong in the same party as these people.
Go ahead and dismiss me as some right-wing extremist, single-issue voter, without whom your party will fare just fine. Just don’t be surprised when the GOP loses elections. (Or in Vermont’s case, keeps losing elections.)
September 15th, 2006 at 1:33 am
term limits??
That’s a decidedly un-Libertarian position to be in favor of. And I’m surprised that you would hold it as well, as you seem to be rather a democratic process purist.
I say, if people want to elect the same person to the same position, its their right. Who is the government to say we can’t decide who we want to represent us, because they feel we can’t be trusted to throw a bum out when appropriate?
There is no more pure example of a so-called “nanny state,” condescending law than mandatory term limits.
September 15th, 2006 at 1:51 am
Is that the same for presidential term limits? Why do we term limit the president, but not the congress?
Anyway, I am not sure if I think term limits should be law. They probably shouldn’t.
The point was that the GOP supported term limits (it was even in the Contract with America) and now they are as power hungry and corrupt as the Democrats they replaced. They could and should have voluntarily term-limited themselves in order to keep the purity of their principles.
Power corrupts. If they continued to refill their seats with new candidates full of fresh idealism, they might not have abandoned their principles.
It was more of a statement about the change in the party’s values than of my support for term limits.
I agree with your points. (Man, I’ve got to stop doing that.)
September 15th, 2006 at 2:25 am
I agree with your points. (Man, I’ve got to stop doing that.)
LOL!
If you want, I can come in here and post about single-payer healthcare or affirmative action, but I have my own blog for things like that…
September 15th, 2006 at 2:27 am
There are libertarians in support of and opposed to term limits. I have switched back and forth on the issue over the years. I’m back to supporting term limits. The person who founded the National Term Limit organization is a libertarian.
As Charity said it is a minor issue of the ones she listed. All the other other issues she listed are decidedly libertarian positions.
September 15th, 2006 at 2:47 am
“I have my own blog for things like that…”
Yeah but people actually read this one
September 15th, 2006 at 3:21 am
Yeah but people actually read this one
ooo!
Y’got, me pardner… everything is going black… Jack…Neil…Ed….don’t let the flame die out!… goodbye….cruel…. world….
September 15th, 2006 at 3:23 am
“Y’got, me pardner…”
Clearly, with a response like that