Saturday, September 10, 2005

Anti-Government Conservativism

We all know that people have lost confidence in Bush (here and here). Yes, he appointed an incompetent loyalist to head FEMA. Yes, he, along with the rest of his administration, were slow to realize what was happening in New Orleans. All that is everywhere on the internet and in the media and needs no more commenting.

Specific catastrophes call for specific answers. But we all need to be discussing the bigger issue and philosophical differences between Democrats and Republicans. The so-called "small government conservatives" want a limited role or no role at all for the federal government. Katrina should make us ask the question: Do we want no government or responsible government?

I'm not one for BIG government reactionism, but I know that government can be effective. We only have to go back one president to find out how a competent FEMA can be successful. Our health care system--a mostly private one--spends more than most countries on administrative costs--read bureaucracy--and we still have about ten million children with no health insurance. Not that we need a BIG government solution, but the anti-government group has clearly failed us on health care. And there's also child care and education.

As we start positioning ourselves for '06 and '08, we need to start thinking about the underlying principles that differentiate us from Republicans. Anti-government and privatization as an end in and of itself vs responsible government is a great place to start.

4 Comments:

At September 10, 2005 7:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Borstein talks about Family Guy movie
I have to admit I've always had a tiny crush on Alex Borstein, who appeared on Mad TV for five seasons, most recognizably as the cryptic Asian Ms.
Love your blog ! I'm bookmarking you!

I have a millionaires site/blog. It touches on millionaires related stuff.

Check it out if you get time :-)

 
At September 13, 2005 11:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

responsible government is a contradiction in terms. it is an organization that funds itself coercively, and is not motivated by any sense of a competitive bottom line. Read: lower quality of service, higher price to pay.

Why would volunteerism be so bad? If you need government to force your views upon people, maybe you should think a little harder about that...

governments arent responsible. they erode citizen's rights under the guise of fairness and equality, and start unneccessary wars. its not a partisian issue...stop pretending like party matters anymore.

 
At September 13, 2005 5:11 PM, Blogger Gilbert Martinez said...

OK, I don't even know respectable anti-government people who seriously hold that conglamerations of people (societies) don't need at least some rules/government for mutual benefit. Of course, I'd love to see someone make a good go at it. I'm personally persuadable.

Fact: The U.S. spends more per capita on health "care" yet leaves more people without insurance.

Fact: The governmentally operated S.S. system is EXTREMELY efficient with pennies on the dollar going to administrative costs.

I guess arguing is a moot point. The anti-government people want all the perks of government--law enforcement, a monetary system, etc.--but don't want to sacrifices that come with it, at least not personal sacrifice. Of course the extreme anti-government people make up such a miniscule proportion of the world's population that no one takes them seriously.

 
At October 02, 2005 2:32 PM, Blogger jon said...

We are trying to find good sports movie to take the kids this weekend. Good sports movie reviews are hard to find

I just stumbled onto your blog while looking. Seems to happen to me a lot since I am a knowledge mooch LOL

Thanks

 

Post a Comment

<< Home