Too often, in discussing the useless sack of GOP candidates, I’ve felt the need to describe them with quotes (as in the “conservative” Mitt Romney, etc.). This is because what we have seen is a dilution of the brand to the point that the word “conservative” can sometimes be swapped with the word “douchecock” (or “frothy cock” when applied to Santorum).
There’s a reason for this. It’s because, just like their liberal counterparts, conservatives lack a consistent philosophy.
Now when I hear conservatives talk about limited government, free markets, and personal responsibility, I’m cheering. But then the candidates they pick perpetuate the government state, and in fact, make it worse (shall I list all the economic sins of W here? Yeah) by expanding departments that never should have been (Department of Education), creating new entitlements (the Medicare drug “benefit”), and crony capitalism at its worst (the bipartisan assraping known as TARP). And then there’s the military, in which we spend more and more on supporting bloated forces around the world in tons of stuff that doesn’t fall under defense or war (which the purpose of a military), and less on the R&D which will make it cheaper and easier to win the next time we need to blow someone up. And for the record, not spending more every year is not a “drastic cut,” you silly sons of bitches.
Even “conservative” (and I use the quotes again because I’m getting stupid damned mixed messages here) icons such as Rush Limbaugh was going on about where big government was a good thing. (listening as I type, his first hour on Wednesday, defending the frothy mix).
And that brings me to the second part of the hypocrisy of the “conservative” movement: the social conservatives.
Now I have assigned myself the label of a conservative libertarian. I came up with this for a simple reason. I get where the social conservatives are coming from. But I append that to the libertarian philosophy because the danger of trying to decide social and moral issues through the political process is that the person writing the law may not share those values (if you’re a Christian conservative, think Sharia or Hare Krishna or pagans or whatever group flips your dinger (I’m available to rewrite the social code)). And it’s in this insistence on growing the government to enforce social mores which should be handled at the local level, or maybe at the state level on a few things, and at the federal level almost NEVER.
Pick your social issue, apply another religion’s morality, and tell me if you like it.
And increasingly, even those who still value traditional morality recognize that in an ever-growing government, all it takes is some idiotic democracy, a bad election result, it doesn’t take much for the state-defined morality to be redefined.
Which brings me to the Iowa results. The contest split three ways, between the establishment’s bitch, Mitt Romney, the social conservatives’ frothy ass monkey and anti-Mitt flavor of the week, Rick Santorum, and the crazy libertarian, Ron Paul, with some outlier for Newt (who’s hanging on) and the now departed (W 2.0) Perry and (Santorum Lite) Bachmann. Update: Perry didn’t drop out for some retarded reason. Like we care….
Ron Paul’s third place finish is disappointing to those of us who are tired of retreading the same shit every 4 years (last time was McDouche, Romney (who did the same he did this time), and Huck-a-Duck). And while it’s disappointing that the majority are still not living up to the principles they espouse, there’s hope that the debate is starting to shift from the current amalgam of government-growing statism and quasi-libertarian to lip service to an actual debate on the pros and cons of government in our daily lives. Because once we stop falling for the hollow rhetoric and even more hollow slogans (“(no) Hope and (only) Change (left in your pocket)” in 2008 versus “Believe in America (What the fuck ever that means)” from Mitt in 2012), then perhaps we can actually address the perils of ever-growing government which will, unchecked (and the likely nominee ain’t gonna do it), lead to the end of this country.
Which is why, in my next post, I’m going to explain why the labels of conservative and liberal are becoming increasingly surrounded in bullshit, interchangeable with Republican and Democrat, and no longer representative of the majority of the country (much like the current two parties). I’d add that now, but I do want you to come back more than once.