The Door Did Miss My Ass on the Way Out
October 29th, 2008 - 9:01 am
Two years ago, I wrote a book imploring the Republican Party not to follow its worst elements off a cliff—not to evolve, in short, into an insular party with little-to-no appeal outside of the rural, the southern, the Evangelical. As the McCain campaign flames out in a ball of Rovian disgrace, scorching the center in an attempt to fire up the base, it’s difficult to reach any other conclusion than that the battle for the soul of the Republican Party has been lost.
A party can ignore an important segment of swing voters for only so long — four-to-eight-years in the case of most right-leaning libertarians — before they finally become disaffected. Can the Republicans win us back?
I dunno. Can they stop taking us for granted?
The Republican Party is the only place to go for voters who want to protect certain things, like the rights of the unborn or the Second Amendment. Even if the individual Republican candidate isn’t great on one of those issues, as long as the Party holds sway, they’ll be all right (which is why it was so silly for the NRA to endorse Rep. Steve Kagen, D-WI).
The Republican party used to be the only place to go for fiscal conservatism – even if they strayed a little, or put moderates in places of authority, overall they were the Party to keep taxes and spending down. But over the last 5 years, we (I’ll say “we” here, because I’m still a Republican) have abandoned that entirely. Abandoned it. Not just a blip on the screen or one bad vote. It’s as if we spent five years passing restrictions on gun rights. Where would the hunters go, then?
Boo hoo, wah. Libertarians can’t stand big tent with people in it who aren’t socially liberal. So they call Palin an idiot and the rest of GOP racists. Bellyache about some guy who said “Kill ‘em” about terrorist Ayers at a McCain rally. And then throw vote away on Barr, ushering in socialist state. Boo hoo, wah.
Jim –
It’s uncharacteristic of you to be so cheap and so wrong.
I’m an unabashed FAN of Palin’s. Sure, we disagree on a lot of social issues — but she’s a real outsider and a real reformer and a real fiscal conservative.
But name ONE THING the Republicans have done to court people like me these last few years, other than give Palin the number two spot on the ticket?
Record spending, new programs, bailouts, etc.
There are only three areas, domestically, where McCain might conceivably be better than Obama: Taxes, judges, and freedom of speech.
Unfortunately, McCain wouldn’t recognize a new Scalia or a Thomas if they bit him on the ass. McCain’s contempt for free speech is now the law of the land, thanks to McCain-Feingold. And how likely is he to get tax reform through a heavily-Democratic Congress?
McCain would be far better than Obama on foreign policy — and that’s the only reason I’ve considered voting for him. But his contempt for small-l libertarians like myself has been palpable this entire election season, so you’ll excuse me if I return the favor.
Sorry for my little hissy fit, it was cheap and out-of-line of me, VP. In fact, I share your readiness to ditch the GOP because of spending. I get irked when I see libertarian GOP treat Palin-type Christians the way the Hitchenses and Dawkins of the world treat them, when if fact the most reasonable and open-minded people I’ve met in the last five years include loads of evangelical, social conservatives.
Again, sorry, and thanks for letting me comment on your blog.
As for Palin, I was thinking of Sager’s “the corrosive choice of pipeline-prayer Sarah Palin.”
Steve,
There are only three areas, domestically, where McCain might conceivably be better than Obama: Taxes, judges, and freedom of speech.
You’re wrong.
1: Earmarks, and spending in general. McCain has been better about that his whole career. Palin has been great on spending in Alaska (surging revenue, and she still vetoed a ton of spending, and sent the money to the people to spend, instead).
2: Energy and the Environment. “Drill, baby drill.” Palin is excellent on this, and McCain is light-years ahead of Obama.
3: The Court: Will McCain appoint a Scalia of Thomas? Unlikely.
But one or two more Kennedy’s are still a hell of a lot better than anyone Obama would appoint.
Kennedy is an attention whore. He’s “the most important Supreme Court Justice.” If we get another one like him, that ends. Replace Souter, or Stevens, with a Kennedy clone, and the one who joins with the four “conservatives” is the special one. Whereas if they both vote with the lefties, neither one gets to be the special one.
4: Taxes: How likely is Obama to get his tax raises through a Democrat Congress? If McCain accomplishes nothing on taxes, that will still be better than Obama.
But name ONE THING the Republicans have done to court people like me these last few years,
Guns. Yes, the US filed a bad amicus brief in Heller, but what kind of brief the Kerry Administration have filed (and do you think Kerry’s two appointees would have voted the same way as Roberts or Alito)?
Steen’s and Young are both going to lose, the President will be an anti-earmark crusader, and the VP will be a woman who made her political bones pissing off corrupt earmarkers and big spenders.
This isn’t the ticket I wanted, but it’s the ticket we’ve got. On the other side, we’ve got a guy who hates everything libertarians stand for, at the head of a party that hates every libertarian economic policy around. If he’s President, he will have Congressional support for policies you hate.
Plug your nose. By all means, get drunk afterwards. But vote for McCain / Palin. We can’t afford Obama.
Greg –
I’ll address just one point before I hit the sack: Judges.
Functionally, is there a difference between a Souter and a Ginsburg?
And could McCain get (much less pick out by his own Constitution-dismissing self) anyone to the right of Souter past a Democratic Senate?
OK, one other item since I still have a little scotch left in my glass. Taxes? Give me a break. The Bush Cuts are due to expire in 2010, and, again, there is no way McCain will get them extended in the next Congress. At best, McCain gives us a year. That’s best case.
And with McCain’s love for reaching around — er, across — the aisle, the best case hardly ever comes to pass.
Steve,
I think David Bernstein over at volokh has a lot more libertarian street credit than I do, so I wanted to point you to his post on why he’s voting for McCain.
Functionally, is there a difference between a Souter and a Ginsburg?
No, there isn’t. Is McCain going to pick someone that far to the left? I don’t see why. (And I don’t think Senate Republicans would roll over and play dead for a Souter, either. Remember Meirs.) Will you agree that Kennedy is better than Souter? He was approved by a Democrat Senate. As was Thomas (hello, Janice Rogers Brown).
Will McCain, self-righteous and power hungry prick that he is, be willing to fight the Democrats in the Senate over his judges? I think so. Is that the kind of fight we want to see? Oh, yeah. There’s nothing like a fight over Supreme Court nominees to get the Republicans out to vote out Democrat Senators. And, since the majority of Americans agree that judges should follow the law (rather than their own personal preferences), and the “Living Constitution” “judges” tend to be rather anti-libertarian, that’s a fight we’d like to have.
Taxes: Obama, with a Democrat House and Senate, will raise taxes. A lot. This is the guy, after all, who told Charlie Gibson he was in favor of raising the capital gains tax rate even if doing so didn’t bring in any extra money. McCain proposing tax cuts, and failing, is still infinitely better than Obama.
Yes, he likes to “reach across the aisle.” However, the place he’s most likely to do that is immigration where, last I checked, you more or less agreed with him.
I don’t like McCain. I didn’t want to vote for him. I donated money to Rudy and Fred during the primary. I’ve never given a penny to McCain, and I never will. But Obama’s so much worse that I’ve reluctantly come to decide I have to work my ass off for McCain.
Recall that McCain blew of the Iowa caucuses because of his long-standing opposition to ethanol subsidies. And he’s strongly pro free trade. So there’s two other libertarian things in his favor.