Que
aʒɑ̃ prɔvɔkatœr
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
- Posts
- 39,882
That's it exactly. The smaller government message is a winner, I think. But when the small government is only selective (don't regulate guns, banks, or business . . . but marriage and birth control are on the table), the message is lost, and they look hypocritical. Whether it will translate into minority votes is anyone's guess, but it's a place to start.
the last of my air-quotes conservative views to fall were the tendency for so called conservatives to be war hawks.
This dates back to the cold war when progressives were, lets be honest, a little less than concerned about the tenants of socialism being spread around the globe since they are big fans of Marx in all the hallowed halls where progressive thought is promulgated.
So the idea was we needed this big Military Industrial Complex to keep the Rooskies at bay, despite Eisenhower's sage warning on the subject.
What persuaded me was not just the waste of money (although it is), the world perception that we are kind of bullies...none of that bothered me much...what persuaded me was how is it conservative to want the government out of my business but into the business of some tribesman in a hut on one side or the other of a not-recognized line between Pakistan (or Pock-E-Stahn if you learned geography in Indonesia) and Afghanistan??
Charlie Wilson's war had its uses. It bankrupted the Soviets because stingers are far cheaper than Hinds. Economically it made sense. But morally? How and why is that moral?