George Will promotes a libertarian GOP

I've always likeed George Will because he's an honest intellectual, although I've disagreed with him many times. I've never disagreed greatly with Will, though, because I've understood his nuances, and when he says the GOP should "tilt" toward the libertarian side, I understand he means "tilt", and it's not a full-throated endorsement of libertarian principles, but this is a great endorsement nonetheless.

While David Frum and Centrists are doing goofy things like trying to demonize Rush Limbaugh and to build a statist coalition of social cons, neo cons and Centrist cons, actually praising the populist message of Rick Santorum, a faction on the Right is growing in honest influence without pandering and lying to social cons and neo cons that they would be valuable allies with their present ideologies. It's a straightforward message from libertarians, and Will sees the value in the message.

The libertarian message tells social conservatives that social issues belong in the free market of ideas in which persuasion can be used to bring people around to certain points of views or religious doctrines. This doesn't lead to an immoral nation -- it leads to a free nation where grownups can have serious conversations about morality and religion and aren't forced to behave like children by Big Daddy government. The libertarian message tells the neo cons that America can no longer be the Global Police, and the foreign entanglements are violations of  other nations' sovereignty. It's understood without a doubt that we need a strong military capable of addressing all 21st century threats to national security, but lingering in Afghanistan, interfering in the affairs of Pakistan and Libya and Yemen, ect., is destructive to us and the countries in which we intervene. The history of US interventions in the mideast is a history of failure, unnecessary deaths, misunderstandings, futility, hatred and blackmail. 

The libertarian message to the country is one of peace and prosperity, non-interventionism, limited government, free market, non-coercion, charity, dynamism, cosmopolitanism, open-mindedness, non-partisanship, free trade, anti-cronyism, anti-statism, innovation and creativity. Yes, Mr. Will, I agree, tilt, tilt, tilt! 

Update on Monday, November 12, 2012 at 09:02PM by M. Farmer

Also, I'm fed up with social conservatives who read what I've written and conclude that there's a push to move Christians out of the Republican Party. If this is the message that social cons are understanding, then they are misunderstanding and too caught up in a persecution complex. The principles of Chrisitianity should be strong enough that social cons don't have to hide behind the strong arm of the State.

The old, soggy GOP

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/04/george-will-romneys-biggest-achievement-last-night-might-have-been-changing-the-narrative/

George Will, Peggy Noonan, Joe Scarborough, Sam McKinnon, David Frum, David Brooks, Bruce Bartlett and all the old GOP politicans still talking about moderation who believe that political professionalism is necessary to properly make a way in the political realm should be quite and just watch the election, because they don't understand what's happening. The Republican Party is changing, and it's political professionalism that's leading the way but rather economic freedom and and a break-up of the two-party, statist system that's leading the way.

Enough Americans want interventionsts and meddlers out of DC to make real changes going forward. Romney is not the perfect candidate, but he shows how a real person in the private sector with executive skills, business experience and an understanding of economic freedom can dwarf a political animal who's been propped up by handlers,  political operatives, media sycophants and smart makerting specialists. The private sector went to sleep and allowed the political class to create a powerful State machine, but now the private sector is awake and changes will be made. This ain't your parents GOP.

George Will is predicting an easy Obama win?

What? According to Politico, which has reported they've received an advance copy of a forthcoming Will column, George Will is conceding an Obama victory and calling for the GOP to concentrate on winning congress. I don't even know why Politico receives advance copies, but that's beside the point. What's pertinent is why Will would speculate on the results of the 2012 Presdiential race in March.

Does Will really think Obama is that strong and Romney that weak? In reality, outside MSM twist and spin, Obama is the worst President we've had in decades, at least since Carter. If Will is sincere, then the only explanation is that Will believes the public is too ignorant to reject media propaganda. Will might be right, but I hope he states that clearly in his column.

Otherwise, I'm at a lose why Will believes Obama can beat Romney. Politico says Will predicts not only an Obama win, but a rout. This is even harder to figure out. Let's see -- real unemployment will approach 20%, inflation will approach 10%, and Europe will likely be in worse condition than it is now, plus gas prices will likely flutuate between 4 and 5 dollars, yet Obama will win in a rout? If Will is right, then the public is too frigging ignorant for freedom, so we might as well make Obams King and get it over with.

Articulating free market principles

Why is it so hard for Republicans to articulate free market principles? Every day I listen to pundits explain how Obama's approval ratings are high because the public perceives that recovery is on the way. Is it that media itself doesn't give an opportunity to those on the Right who can explain the principles? Is it because the subject is too difficult? Or, is it because the Right, for the most part, don't understand or really embrace the principles?

Surely there are wordsmiths on the Right who can articulate free market principles in a fashion that inspires the public to search even further for understanding. Glenn Beck does a fairly good job, although lately he's lost his mind over Rick Santorum. George Will has the ability to explain the principles, but I don't see Will on any outlets except ABC's This Week, and I don't know how many people actually watch that program. Plus, is Will a free market advocate -- I mean a real advocate?

Marco Rubio has done a fairly good job, but I don't know if he understands the concepts well enough to simplify the subject for public consumption. Newt Gingrich has the skills to make the case, but Gingrich, for some reason, talks in generalities about a free market, never going into a full explanation with examples and contrasts with statism. I'm not sure how much of Hayek and Mises Gingrich has really studied. I don't think any of the Republican candidates, except for Ron Paul, have read the literature on free market philosophy/economics. That's strange seeing as how they use the words economic and freedom quite often. You would think they'd at least have read Thomas E. Woods, but I don't hear any of them quoting him or referring to him.

The only way the Right is going to make progress against progressivism is to debunk the ideology and to explain why statism doesn't work and can't work. Reagan made progress because he could talk about socialism and capitalism, but none of the candidates, aside from Paul, seem to have the ability to articulate what they believe in -- do they believe in a free market? I mean really. This, I think, is the problem. Santorum and Gingrich don't believe in a free market, and I don't know about Romney. What they mean by freeing up our economy and stopping government over-reach is that they would not regulate as much as Obama, and their focus wouldn''t be to redistribute income. But they don't mean that they will fight to roll back regulations on the books to create a truly free market.

Deep down, most in the Republican Party don't believe a truly free market will work -- they think government has to prevent the jungle of a free market from hurting people and creating chaos for large corporations -- they just don't focus on statist plans to create even more government control. There are enough laws and regulations on the book for government to control any area of economic activity it wishes to control, so Republicans can talk big without revealing how they will go about rolling back decades of regulations. Paul has a plan, but this is why Republicans attempt to marginalize Paul -- they are afraid that Paul will gain enough influence to pressure Republicans to walk like they talk.

The reason we don't have anyone standing before audiences and explaining free market principles is because only Ron Paul  believes in the principles -- maybe Gary Johnson, and perhaps a few of the New Republicans -- but Republicans with influence have no intention of creating a free market.

Morning Joe 12/12/2011 -- Newt Romney, Stalin, Marx and Obama

On Morning Joe today during the first segment the guests were Steve Rattner, John Meacham, David Reznick, Chuck Todd and Jeff Miron. It appears there are several narratives building steam in the political class. One narrative is a cross between Obama defense and Republican-trashing. Scarborough and the other regulars believe Newt Gingrich is poison for the GOP, and Mika, Reznick and others on the Left believe this will help reelect Obama. The Morning Joe gang focuses on Republican gaffes, but pretty much ignores the Democrat implosion. The Morning Joe crew did give a critique of Obama's problems going into 2012, but Scarborough made a big deal over one poll that shows Obama winning against either Gingrich and Romney in South Carolina. David Reznick gave the explanation, but it was ignored as Scarborough brought up the poll several more times and said it's amazing. I know SC, and SC has a large African-American community. Many of these African-Americans don't usually vote, but they'll vote for Obama. It's not a surprise that Obama would be ahead in SC at this point, since Obama doesn't yet have an opponent. This is a ridiculous poll to highlight.

Scarborough called the Republican primary a clown show. Scarborough also made a big deal over Lindsey Graham's comments on Meet the Press when Graham said the Consumer Protection Bureau is something out of the Stalin era because it posits so much control in one person. Scarborough said that 30 million people died during the Stalin era, and that Republicans shouldn't use these exteme examples. Later Scarborough agreed with George Will's comment that newt Gingrich would have made a good Marxist. Marxism is responsible for over a hundred millions deaths, so why is a Stalin era comparison any worse than a Marxist comparison? It's due to sloppy thinking, and it's the problem with political spin. Graham was talking about a system of governance -- he was not making a comparison between the Stalin the Butcher and Obama the Progressive. George Will was making a comparison between a system builder like Marx and his followers and Newt the system builder. Scarborough is the only one jumping the shark.

Another narrative being pushed by the political class is that Republicans will eventually settle on a moderate, but Chuck Todd appears to get it. Many voters in 2012 will be looking for a change in direction. Those in the political class who want to maintain the status quo in DC will hope for an Obama win but will accept someone like Romney -- however, the political class will not decide this election. For those concerned with the Progressive policies which have made the economy worse, electing representatives who will maintain the status quo is unacceptable.

No one in the political class is focusing on the problems with Obama and the Progressives in the Democrat Party. Obama's Kansas speech was a rejection of free market principles, and it was loaded with propaganda. Fact checkers have revealed the speech as full of misrepresentations. The Morning Joe crew talked about Obama's idea that the system within which he works is insufficient for his skills, but they didn't show how ridiculous this is in light of Obama's incompetence and lack of economic understanding. If anything is a clown show, it's the administration, but it's being covered up by media. Yes, some in media have criticized Obama from the Left, but it's usually because he hasn't been progressive enough. This is the real issue that should be discussed -- how progressive policies are pushing the nation over the cliff. It really won't matter who is elected President in 2012 if we can't change the direction, so who's voted into congress will likely be more important than who winds up as President.

Jeff Miron was on the show, but they wasted the few minutes he was on by pitting him against Steve Rattner with not enough time to make the case for free market principles. It's ridiculous to have a couple of minutes to explain concepts which require months of study to understand. The way it's going right now, hardly anyone appears to understand the real issues facing our nation. The federal government has gained so much power, it will take years to rollback what has already been implemented. If we don't change directions and limit government power, all this political talk about personalities and political strategy are moot.