The ever so poorly named “Reason Magazine” has put out an article preposterously titled “5 Reasons Why
Conservatives Should Root For a Romney Defeat.” Lately Libertarians have been getting more and more annoying with their embrace of full blown isolationism (which given how it has NEVER worked, means they’re either very, very stupid or in favor of tyrannies being free to do whatever evil they wish) and their recent and exceedingly naïve push for the gold standard as a cure all for all economic woes. This is not the libertarian party I once knew of sound economic restraint and social liberalism…this is now a libertarian party of cowards and cranks. So let me refute their 5 reasons to not vote for Romney.
1. Reason claims because the Supreme Court will only overturn the individual mandate but leave the rest of Obamacare…because Romney and the Republicans don’t have the guts now to overturn the rest of the law we should let Obama stay in office and let a real reformer get in office in 2016 who will then overturn the law. Common sense states that you would give some reasons to back this up but Reason’s article seemed quite lacking, in well, reason.
This is stupid for three reasons. The first being that if the Supreme Court overturns one part, they’re probably taking it all out (Scalia’s comment about “you don’t expect us to go through this line by line do you”)…further it would require you to believe that the justices who are voting to overturn the mandate would leave all the economically disastrous parts that a mandate was a necessity to pay for. The second is that Romney has promised to overturn the law in toto and will send that law on the first day in office to Congress, which if passed in the first week of his administration it has the most chance of getting through Congress with little disagreement. The third being that, while the economically stupid issue of covering preexisting conditions needs to go, after another four years of Obama it will NEVER be overturned as no Congressmen, no matter how conservative, will have the guts to take away something that has been around for so long.
2. Reason’s second claim is in two parts , first that you just can’t trust that evil flip-flopper Romney. This is a claim that is without basis. Romney’s changed his position on abortion…everything else is liberal lies. Thank you libertarians for being dumb enough to believe liberal lies and immoral enough to repeat them…not to mention demonstrating liberal tendencies by not doing the research!
The second part of their reasons to not vote for Romney is that he will make our military second to none. Oh, how terrible. When did libertarianism become the philosophy of cowards and complicity in tyranny via our isolation.
3. They don’t trust Romney to do away with Crony Capitalism as he says he will do (and as he did as much as he could with limited power in Massachusetts). Why doesn’t Reason believe him…because he supported the financial bailout. Which is kind of dumb. Yes TARP was a horribly conceived and horribly executed program…but to do nothing as libertarians seem to suggest would have been equally stupid. For years government conspired to force the financial sector to give out all those crappy loans (and yes they did force and threaten them with criminal and civil lawsuits if they didn’t give them out) so while the financial sector is not exactly saintly and has more than enough blame to go around on its own, the government is equally at fault. But the libertarians argue that after you’ve stabbed someone in the kidney it’s their responsibility to heal themselves. Huh? Yes TARP should have been drastically smaller and shorter, it should have been more targeted and not an industry wide panacea, it should have probably been designed to cure the shock waver after one of the major banks went belly up to prevent a panic not preventing them all from failing, but you know what, not doing anything would have been as bad if not worse. And yes Bush, Congress and the Fed deserve a lot of blame for not doing a more limited plan, but that does not mean an outsider who had no say at any level of the decision making process should take the blame for supporting what may be the lesser of two evils. So I can’t fully hit Romney for being pragmatic and saying, yes we need TARP.
Reason also claims that calling China on its economic corruption is a bad thing. I’m confused by their stance, probably again because Reason failed to state any reason for their belief and rather preferred to make an uninformed hitpiece.
4. Oh and if we elect Romney then no “real conservative” will be able to run in 2016. True, I look forward to Romney’s second term. However, since Reason’s definition of true conservative is a person who holds to the insane dogma of Austrian economics and who is a complete coward in foreign policy. You know a “real conservative” unlike that filthy Monetarist, strong foreign policy, fake conservative Ronald Reagan. Somehow I’m not being swayed by Reason’s arguments.
5. And their fifth argument, losing will allow the GOP to collapse…and theoretically realign itself…despite the fact that, realignment actually usually occurs when a party wins the White House (Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, McKinley, FDR…and I can’t think of a realignment that occurred when the party lost…but these are libertarians, the people who ignored all the economic panics, recessions and depressions caused by the gold standard and who completely failed to notice the utter failure of isolationism throughout all of history…no shock they don’t understand how realignments work historically).
So let me now respond with 5 reasons why libertarians should back Romney.
- He has a history of actually doing what libertarians like: cutting government and not raising taxes.
- Romney is actually endorsing the plan of reformers like Paul Ryan. He also is backed by a whole team of some the best minds in every field…just check his website…unlike Reason which apparently is working off of innuendo and media lies. And again go to his website, no candidate in my life time has ever had so much data to review as Romney has provided…and it’s all great
- For supposed economic conservatives I don’t understand why libertarians would be so hostile to someone who is actually from the private sector. This is the kind of guy who actually knows what he is doing. He is not a career politician (he’s only ever held one other elected office for one term), thus he is not beholden to the bureaucracy or the party, he has no favors to fulfill which will actually help to end cronyism. Also cronyism occurs when you have something to gain…remind me how you actually bribe a man who is both rich and not avaricious (as judged by his overly generous charitable contributions).
- This country cannot survive another 4 years of Obama. 4 more years of over regulation, taxation, government abuse of power, extreme deficit spending, and insane union support will gut this country and if it doesn’t result in a global depression to make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park, the only reason that we won’t become a 2nd rate power is because everyone else will fall faster than we do.
- Do you remember how reviled the Greens were in the Democratic party after handing the election to Bush (yes I’ll admit if Nader hadn’t run then Gore would have won)…well if you jackasses were to hand the election to Obama then you would be even more reviled and will guarantee the death of the libertarian strain in the Republican party (i.e. you’ll be handing the party to the social conservatives).