At CFIF,
I analyze a great
new column by Reihan Salam on rising right-leaning political
star Artur Davis, former Democratic congressman from Alabama.
Writes Salam:
The really interesting question about Davis’s political future
is whether the GOP will become the party of Daniels and Christie
and Jeb Bush or, as its critics allege, something narrower, angrier
and more ideological. Davis has made it clear that he believes
conservatives should seek to reform and improve government as well
as contain its growth. This is a conviction widely shared among
real-world Republicans.
The key, to me, is to reform and improve ”as well
as” to contain its growth. This is not an “either/or”
proposition. There is no reason we can’t do both.
Derek Leaberry| 8.30.12 @ 12:44PM
So the Republican Party should revert back to being the party of George Romney.
Dai Alanye | 8.30.12 @ 12:47PM
How can government be reformed and improved without a reduction in its size? Containing government growth doesn't go nearly far enough.
Mike G| 8.30.12 @ 1:52PM
I agree. It seems that reforming and improving government would automatically reduce its size by eliminating all the things it does that government shouldn't be doing. That's where most of the waste and fraud comes in.
RJ| 8.30.12 @ 12:48PM
My objective is limited, effective, legal & honest government that respects individual liberty and acts impartially with equality under the law for all.
mjs_pa| 8.30.12 @ 1:49PM
Would your ferocious attack upon Todd Akin be an example of being "angrier?"
BTW, Akin now leads in MO by 3% points.
Oldefarte| 8.30.12 @ 3:10PM
While I delight in conversions to the RP, many of us yawned at his speech somewhat. What I remember about same was his lamenting the disappointment he felt regarding Obama's words versus his deeds. With no disrespect to Davis meant or intended here, IMHO anyone who voted for, supported or once believed in Obama is a damned fool. African-Americans sadly are guilty of this type offense on a wholesale level traditionally, with the Obamas, the Jacksons, the Waters, the Conyers etc the beneficiaries of same. To vote for a candidate solely due to the identical color of one's skin and to the exclusion of all other considerations is beyond the word STUPID. It's no different than voting/supporting a candidate because you're both Catholic, both Southerners, both Yankees, both airplane pilots, both one-eyed-one-horned-purple-people-eaters etc. Voters should only consider the candidate's factual qualifications for the job. Will they be able to accompolish the needed tasks? Are they educationally qualified? What is their intent on seeking the position? Americans by their vote are HIRING A CANDIDATE to do a job, and if they hire on some DA reason suc as skin color only, then they are asinine and stupid!!!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 8.30.12 @ 3:19PM
PS: I confess to being somewhat partially guilty of this offense in that I have historically chosen Jewish doctors and lawyers almost exclusively, since I know with almost 100% probability that they as such will be professionally outstanding and knowledgable and that the job they do will be correct and successfully completed. Guilty as charged, as one Caty would exclaim!!!!!
darcy| 8.30.12 @ 3:12PM
Pardon me, Salam, but isn't the GOP already the party of Daniels, Christie, and Jeb Bush -- poster boys of the establishment -- and isn't this why the country has veered so far left in its governance? The establishment likes to characterize its conservative base as "narrow": yes, we're narrow -- we like things done in Washington according to the enumerated powers set forth in our AUTHORITY for governing, the Constitution. We're angry: yes, we're angry that the Republican establishment refuses to dance with the one that brought them to power, making little effort to hide their disdain for us. We're "more ideological": yes, we recognize that ideas have consequences, and that the consequence of perpetual appeasement to statism -- itself an ideological position -- is the growing marginalization of OUR ideas.
Thank you, Quin, for the reference to your CFIF analysis of Salam article. I will read it when I calm down.
fmm| 8.30.12 @ 5:13PM
The words reform and improve mean exactly nothing when used in this manner. They are the same as hope and change as there is no explanation of their meaning, in detail. As a practical example, if a mechanic says they are going to improve the performance of your car, what do they mean? Are they going to increase its mpg, or make it accelerate faster, make it more level in turns, or give you a more comfortable ride? If you don't know which, then you are buying a pig in a poke.