Email Message
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    « Morning News 2/28/2013 -- Woodward, gun control, sequester, Syria | Main | Chris Christie a Moderate Liberal Populist »

    Morning Joe 2/27/2013 -- Center-Left and Chris Christie

    On Morning Joe today, Joe Scarborough continued his rant against the Republican base and for Chris Christie. Over and over Scarborough and his guests brought up how out of touch the Republican base is with the electorate. The Morning Joe crew offered poll results regarding how the public likes the way Democrats are handling SS, Medicare, healthcare and so forth moreso than Republicans. The polls showed that 61% want tougher gun laws. Scarborough's point is that Republicans have to start responding to what people want if the GOP is going to ever return to power. This is confusing for several reasons.

    Let's say Scarborough is right and that the GOP must respond to popular demands. This is not what we want from government. Scarborough is more liberal than conservative, and I'm not criticizing this, only making an observation. Scarborough wouldn't feel the same if Republicans did have power and the public wanted to outlaw abortion and to censor free speech for moral reasons. A big part of government's responsibilities is to resist public demands if what the public wants will violate individual rights. Just because the public wants something doesn't mean government has to provide it -- that's what's got us in trouble. Yes, Democrats might maintain power for awhile by giving the people what they want, even if it violates individual rights, but Republicans should go in the opposite direction, because the statist direction is bad for the nation and will ruin the nation

    To make it confusing, though, on one hand Scarborough says Republicans need to respond to public demand, but on the other hand he says Christie is a conservative champion because Christie has fought against liberal encroachments and demands for more government power to protect unions and such. This contradicts his earlier call for a response to public demand regarding expansion of government power -- but what he says about Christie is not true anyway. Christie is not a conservative champion "breathing fire" against liberals. Christie is pouring millions down the black hole of state-run education. Just yesterday, Christie embraced Obamacare for the state of NJ.

    Obamacare is the worst liberal encroachment to affect America in a long time, maybe the worst of all time -- we'll see. Obamacare is a mongrel healthcare plan that is so poorly designed it could be the final hit against the economy that leads to collapse. Obamacare is a mess, and yet Christie is short-sightedly grabbing hold because the federal government offered to pay 100% of the Medicaid expansion for three years. What happens after three years? This is why pragmatism is a problem in most cases, although Scarborough praised Christie for his pragmatism. This is what happens -- politicans make short-term political decisions when they should stand on principles to avoid the unintended consequences that will surely follow in NJ and other states embracing Obamacare.

    Scarborough has also called for the Republican Party to take a different approach to foreign policy. He believes, as I do, that the US should get out of Afghanistan and stop these futile interventions in other nations. I've often wondered how strongly Scarborough holds this principle regarding non-interventionism, but now it appears the principle is not all that important, at least when it comes to support of Christie. Christie has said that our objectives have been met in Afghanistan, but he also said we should stay until the Generals tell us it's time to go. The Generals will want us in the mideast forever if they get their way. We can't let out foreign policy be controlled by Generals -- they are good at fighting wars, but our Commander in Chief with the advice of other civilian government officials should decide when we leave, and Congress can decide to not fund a war if it's a war we have no business fighting. We have a balance of powers for a reason. I can imagine Christie in the position of Commander in Chief, with all that power at his disposal -- what I envision is a nightmare of hawkish bluster and adventurism we need to avoid.

    Christie has also said that America has to be the World Police. This is not a traditional conservative idea. Some in the Republican Party are trying to remove America from the job of World Police, disassociate from neo-conservatism, and this shouldn't be derailed by a return of faux-patriotism and tough-guy talk at the expense of soldiers who've been abused by putting them in Global Police roles. Christie can't be the face of the New Republican Party. The Left pretends to love him now, but when it comes down to Christie against Hillary, the question will be why elect Christie when he's the same as Hillary and the Democrats do statism better?

    PrintView Printer Friendly Version

    EmailEmail Article to Friend