Are Republicans Turning Into Libertarians?

[Admiral Yi]

I'm drawing a conclusion about the Republican Party right now, thus I think the last 16 years or so is adequate and for that period I think my conclusion is reasonably reasonable.

If the last 16 years are adequate then you need to account for Republican controlled Senate and House trying to cut spending under Clinton, not increase it, and your conclusion is no longer so reasonably reasonable.

[Jacob]

If the last 16 years are adequate then you need to account for Republican controlled Senate and House trying to cut spending under Clinton, not increase it, and your conclusion is no longer so reasonably reasonable.

Nah, it holds.  Like most Americans they care the most about the winner and the leader, in this case the president, so they considered themselves in opposition since it was held by a Democrat.  Consequently, they used the "we're against big government" while campaigning until they won.  At which point their true colours were shown.

[Norgy]

A fat, bloated, intrusive government isn't a good thing either

Just think of it as a sexually abusive, overweight older brother. 

[dps]

If the last 16 years are adequate then you need to account for Republican controlled Senate and House trying to cut spending under Clinton, not increase it, and your conclusion is no longer so reasonably reasonable.

Nah, it holds.  Like most Americans they care the most about the winner and the leader, in this case the president, so they considered themselves in opposition since it was held by a Democrat.  Consequently, they used the "we're against big government" while campaigning until they won.  At which point their true colours were shown.

I don't really agree.  If Gingrich had still been Speaker of the House when Bush took office, the President would have found Congress much less willing to go along with his domestic spending plans, I think.

[Razgovory]

Yi wants Reagan.

He wants the myth of Reagan.  Not the real Reagan.

[Razgovory]

I don't really agree.  If Gingrich had still been Speaker of the House when Bush took office, the President would have found Congress much less willing to go along with his domestic spending plans, I think.

This doesn't necessarily contradict what Jacob said.  Gingrich is about small government but rest of the GOP isn't.  Anyway Gingrich writes alt-history so everything he stands for is wrong.

[Eddie Teach]

I think it's pretty simple, when the Republicans (as a party, many exceptions exist for individual Republicans) aren't in government they hate the government and express this by opposing "big government".  When they are in power, they don't hate the government very much and try to influence it to do what they think is right.

Thus the opposition to "big government" is primarily a reflection of "we lost the election".  It will probably be reflected is specific electioneering language, but it does not necessarily (or even probably) indicate that any future hypothetical Republican governments will shrink the size of government (though they'll likely shrink the size of programs they disagree with).

Just a guess.

Yeah, similarly the Dems have been a lot quieter about Obama continuing Bush policies on War on Terror.

[Berkut]

Yeah, similarly the Dems have been a lot quieter about Obama continuing Bush policies on War on Terror.

Good point.

Interesting that the Languish left is not lambasting Obama for torturing people at Gitmo, for example, even though he is doing the exact same thing there in regards to treatment as Bush.

Funny that.

[DGuller]

There hasn't been a shortage of anguish over gay marriage in the past few months, and I haven't heard of a big shift on abortion policy.

Libertarians don't have to be pro-choice.

[Grey Fox]

Yeah, similarly the Dems have been a lot quieter about Obama continuing Bush policies on War on Terror.

Good point.

Interesting that the Languish left is not lambasting Obama for torturing people at Gitmo, for example, even though he is doing the exact same thing there in regards to treatment as Bush.

Funny that.

It was always Bush hate.

[KRonn]

My feeling is that many people, Dems or Repubs, are pretty frustrated with the political process. The process has been going on for years, nothing new there, but the economic downturn and the resultant actions taken by Congress and the last two Pres Admins have received a lot more attention, lots of unfavorable attention and people are realizing it's business as usual, and not liking it. So I think more people are looking at something besides the Dems/Repubs.

As for Pres Obama, he's getting favorable ratings, which is not rubbing off on Dems in Congress. Repubs are already in the doldrums. And indeed, Obama is finally trying to tackle some issues that the past admins and Congresses have failed on. Of course, I have a lot of reservations about how these changes will be enacted, given the scandalous way Congress and the political process seems to work. So we may get change - energy, health care, immigration, social security, all needed. But I'm a bit fearful of what that change will look like, as Congress or the Pres try to please everyone, and put through poorly designed policies. We saw that with Bush and the immigration bill monster that no one on either side of the issue liked. And the various bail out bills, badly constructed and poorly implemented.

[Faeelin]

Good point.

Interesting that the Languish left is not lambasting Obama for torturing people at Gitmo, for example, even though he is doing the exact same thing there in regards to treatment as Bush.

Funny that.

What're you talking about? I posted an article and discussed how it was contemptible a couple of weeks ago, and have made it clear how he's been a failure on a great many issues.

I've hardly been the only  Languish leftist to criticize the man.

[derspiess]

Good point.

Interesting that the Languish left is not lambasting Obama for torturing people at Gitmo, for example, even though he is doing the exact same thing there in regards to treatment as Bush.

Funny that.

What're you talking about? I posted an article and discussed how it was contemptible a couple of weeks ago, and have made it clear how he's been a failure on a great many issues.

I've hardly been the only  Languish leftist to criticize the man.

Go on.

[saskganesh]

I think it's pretty simple, when the Republicans (as a party, many exceptions exist for individual Republicans) aren't in government they hate the government and express this by opposing "big government".  When they are in power, they don't hate the government very much and try to influence it to do what they think is right.

Thus the opposition to "big government" is primarily a reflection of "we lost the election".  It will probably be reflected is specific electioneering language, but it does not necessarily (or even probably) indicate that any future hypothetical Republican governments will shrink the size of government (though they'll likely shrink the size of programs they disagree with).

Just a guess.

Yeah, similarly the Dems have been a lot quieter about Obama continuing Bush policies on War on Terror.

one more time :actually if you leave the languish bubbleboy reality, and head to some leftist-dem sites, you'll see there's a lot of anger, dissapointment and debate.

but many self-declared "critical thinkers" are either lazy or just stupid.

[Berkut]

Funny, I didn't need to head to any left-wing sites to see all that anger and disappointment  and "debtate" before Obama took power. Why do I need to now?