Monday, June 06, 2005

The Agitator is sad

Further to my previous comments, there is another reason why I no longer have any enthusiasm for getting the CPC elected. Most enthusiasm I ever had previously was based on the assumption that it was the best (or only) step towards smaller, more focused government - or at the very least a reduction in the government's growth rate.

Based on results below the 49th, that assumption is, and perhaps always was, false. To wit:
  1. Americans are generally more supportive/receptive to limited government rhetoric than Canadians.
  2. Republicans have controlled Congress for most of the past 10+ years, and the White House for the past 4+ years.
Despite this, the U.S. federal government is bigger and more intrusive than ever. Right-wingers are stuck either makinig excuses (e.g. Powerline), or barking at the moon, and I mean that in the nicest possible way.

For a great example of the latter, see John Cole at Balloon Juice. Get a load of this list, in a post titled "So Much For What We Stand For":
Federalism- nope, don't need it.

Limited Government- nah- useless.

Fiscal Responsibility- forget it- outdated.

Tradition?- Whatever, loserboy.

Fair play?- For credit card companies, not for you.

State's rights- a quaint idea.

Separation of Church and State- Fuhgeddaboutit!

Limiting entitlement programs- nonsense!

Compassionate conservatism- meaningless buzzwords.

[...]

I expect that pretty soon the shills for the administration will be reading Dick Gephardt's old 'fair trade' speeches for justification for this. Exactly what does this party of mine believe in, really? I guess it can be summed up as this:

Money talks, and our bullshit walks.

Go to Cole's post for hyperlinks to all his examples. As for me, I can't think of one good reason why the CPC wouldn't be even worse.

I bring this up today because of the Supreme Court of the United States' affirmation that the federal government is allowed to prohibit people from growing small amounts of marijuana
  • in their own homes
  • for their own use
  • in accordance with their state laws
as a legitimate regulation of interstate commerce. For lots of details and angst-ridden analysis, go to Radley Balko's blog and just keep scrolling. Here's Clarence Thomas summing things up in his dissent:
If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything--and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.

It's the feel-good story of the summer! Pricks.

UPDATE: David BernsteinInstapundit):
...the Republican Congress is vying with the Democratic Congresses of the 1930's and 1960's as the biggest supporter of increased federal power in American history.

2 Comments:

At 12:22 PM, Blogger GOD said...

Ek Verstien

 
At 5:22 PM, Blogger Greg said...

The libertarians' mistake was thinking they controlled the Republican party. It is wholly owned by the socons and the multinational corporations, both of whom don't mind big government as long as it does their bidding.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home