TheAgitator.com
My Slide Leftward
Saturday, June 21st, 2003Ronald Bailey joins the ACLU, and explains why.
I may follow him. In fact, in that I oppose the death penalty, I’m probably even more in line with the ACLU than Ron is — though on the points where I differ with them, I differ with them profoundly.
I feel myself slipping ever leftward these days. I was talking to a friend last night, and was a bit shocked to hear myself say that if I were advising a college kid looking for an internship right now, I’d recommend he work for the ACLU far before I’d ever recommend he work for the Heritage Foundation or AEI.
I don’t think it’s because my principles have shifted. I’m just as anti-tax, anti-regulation, and anti-PC as I’ve ever been. I suppose if there’s one area I have grown more sympathetic to the left on since Bush took office, it’s in the area of corporate influence — the conflagration and incestuous intermingling of some corporations and government. That’s certainly not inconsistent with libertarianism — these kinds of relationships are anything but market-friendly — but it’s definitely more in line with left-libertarian thinking than right-libertarian thinking.
But I think my growing sympathy for the left grows largely from my belief that the right right now poses a greater threat to freedom than the left. Since I discovered my libertarianism, I’ve always justified my votes for Republicans on the grounds that I thought there was less chance of a worst-case Republican scenario coming to fruition than a worst-case Democrat scenario. That is, I thought there was a greater likelihood that our economy would degenerate into European socialism than that we’d become a police state, or an almost-theocracy. I still don’t think the latter has much chance of happening, but the former certainly does, if it hasn’t started to already.
PATRIOT and PATRIOT II ought to scare the bejeezus out of you. John Ashcroft’s (and by extension, the White House’s) hypocrisy on states’ rights ought to infuriate you. The right’s efforts to federalize every high-profile crime that hits the newspapers for cheap political points ought to disgust you.
Yes, Democrats are every bit as complicit in much of this as the Republicans (Biden’s RAVE Act comes to mind). And I’d wager my right pinky that if Al Gore had been elected, we’d have seen just as an agressive post-9/11 Justice Department as Ashcroft’s (Janet Reno, anyone?)
But my point is not that the Democrat Party is an acceptable alternative. My point is simply that Republicans aren’t acceptable anymore.
I’m still positively befuddled at how President Bush has managed to position himself to the left of John Sweeney on free trade. Even the (very) few good things this administration has done on trade — the bilateral agreement with Chile, for example — were at least temporarily held captive by the war with Iraq (we threatened to reneg on the agreement if Chile didn’t support us in the Security Council). What does it say about left-right alignment when, twenty years from now, President Clinton will be remembered as a free trade president, and President Bush won’t?
After “compromising” with Teddy Kennedy, the only thing left of the education bill President Bush campaigned on was national testing — the one provision that expands, not contracts, federal influence in public schools.
I’m about 90% certain now that I won’t be voting for President Bush in 2004. It’s no longer a “lesser of two evis” decision. The only reasons this administration has given libertarians to support it come in the form of what it promises to do next term. But it really hasn’t accomplished (or even attempted) anything it promised to do in its first term — save for a meager, highly-targeted tax cut, most of which phases out in 3-5 years anyway.
President Bush could have used the swell of support he enjoyed just after 9/11, and during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, to push through some truly meaningful reform — the kind that would return measurable quantities of liberty to those of us who supported him. Instead, he’s used 9/11 and our national emergency in the same way every wartime president before him has — he’s used it to expand the power and scope of the federal government, and you simply can’t grant the government more power without snatching a corresponding loss of liberty from the people it governs.
Bush has added another cabinet agency — apparently believing that the way to combat the bureucratic morass that led to our government’s failure on 9/11 can be solved by….creating another bureacracy. He’s commited troops to yet another country for yet another unspecified, indefinite, potentially endless mission. Even discounting for military and homeland security spending, the size of government under Bush has grown substantially — moreso than under Clinton.
I’m as convinced as ever now that the greatest threat to our liberty is not the welfare state, the tax code, or Social Security — though those are all valid concerns. The greatest threat, I think, is directed at our civil liberties, and comes under the guise of national security.
So I may follow Ronald Bailey’s lead. I might join the ACLU.
I’m with you man. I’m in about 90% agreement with the ACLU, but it strikes me that this is a higher hit rate than just about any other political organization. We could talk about the other 10% all day but it’s time to actually get things done.
Balko slides ‘Left’
Bush supporting libertarians should head right over to read this post from Radly Balko. The only reasons this administration has given libertarians to support it come in the form of what it promises to do next term.(I think everyone has a pretty clear …
Speaking of Janet Reno. I was at the Cubs/Sox game yesterday afternoon, sitting in the left field bleacher section. Sitting six seats down from me and wearing a Cubs hat, was Janet Reno. Completey confused, my friend and I had to find out what she was doing in the bleachers. Her response…. “If you’re going to Wrigley, you have to sit in the bleachers.”
Most surreal moment of the afternoon. Ronnie Woo-Woo comes over, slaps her on the back and introduces himself….. absolutely priceless.
I disagree with her on politics, but she was incredibly cool. She even signed my ticket stub.
Please say it ain’t so! OK, you’re decision. But I think you’ll eventually regret it. I did.
To swell the ACLU ranks now, because the “Right” is in power, will only allow them to be bolder, more absurd, and more dangerous to liberty when the “Right” loses power. And believe me the Republicans will eventually be out of power, it’s all cyclical.
You have to take the long view. Americans as a whole are notorious for being short sighted.
Well, good luck with your new “peeps”.
You ought to not tell me what I ought to think.
Radley:
Nearly all of the “contrarian” acts of the Bush Administration you describe are motivated by one simple fact — more than half this nation still sees government as:
> The great equalizer between the evil rich and the rest of us (and “we” insist on getting “ours” through this construct).
> The problem-solver of first resort (”If our government could win WWII and put men on the moon, it can and should do ANYTHING that needs to be done.”)
> The outward expression of our compassion (”If you don’t back this program, you are greedy and mean!”).
I don’t think that Bush, Ashcroft et. al. subscribe to these views (let alone are evil people who are out to dominate us). However, they know that they need the support of at least some of that majority of America to stay in power — and they haven’t yet brought enough of these people to the point that they abandon the above in favor of the sound principles you and I ascribe to.
They also know that, were they to lose power, the leadership of this nation would be in the hands of those who truly believe that the concepts above are sound, and/or see their promotion as stepping stones to greater power. That same opposition also differs from the Administration in one important aspect — they embrace moral relativism to a very high degree,which means they have no qualms about bending the rules to suit them.
The choice that the Administration faces (and us, as well) is to either forsake all compromise — and lose control to people who will vigorously perpetuate these fallacies — or to give a little, and keep their power so they can have more time to change more minds (and that way, even when they lose power, we the people can limit the damage done by the Left).
Until “we the people” stop demanding that government fill these roles, we will keep getting the same kind of leadership, regardless of party affiliation.
Now, I do not believe that the ACLU is the devil incarnate — but their views on civil liberties can be just as extreme as either NARAL or Operation Rescue when it comes to abortion.
Be careful, for you may win the battle of consistency, but lose the war of results you seek to win.
So, I visited the ACLU website and found this bizzare comment from a conference, mentioning that this speaker disagreed with the ACLU on So, I did a little digging and didn’t find any reference to the fundamental civil right, private property. (I also didn’t find any reference to them supporting gun rights, either).
Doing some random digging around,I found this on “Lesbian and Gay Rights” (Whatever those are). ” No federal law prevents a person from being fired or refused a job on the basis of sexual orientation.” This disturbs me profoundly, as I am of the mind that anyone can discriminate against anyone else for any reason. Since an offer/contract for employment is a private function, the government has no business meddling, except to enforce it.
This on “racial equality” - “and a backlash against affirmative action in employment and education threatens to slam the door of opportunity in the faces of those who are most deserving.” and this gem: “The ACLU actively supports affirmative action as a remedy for discrimination in employment and education.” See my comment above on discrimination. (however, on the issue of government supported functions, like education, I believe that there should be absolutely *NO* discrimination or preferences based on race/sex/etc. The beneficiaries of these should be based on merit, like the most qualified student/contractor/etc).
The ACLU is hardly a logically consistent organization, asking for the force of a gun (the government) to meddle in some private relationships but wants it out of others.
Please, Radley, tell me you’re smarter than this.
Radley,
I agree that the Bush administration has expanded the government way beyond what was necessary. I disagree that Democrats would have expanded it less than Bush has. The Democrats came up with Homeland Security. If Gore was president, we still would have this enormous agency, with a much bigger budget and greater ineffencies (more union involvement, etc.).
Kerry, Edwards, Bush: who is a libertarian
The democratic candidates are challenging Bush’s economic position from a variety of stances but at least one of them might do better to get some more education before continuing. It is clear that, as both David and Brian at Catalarchy imply, Kerry doe…
Balko leans left
Radley Balko is joining the ACLU after being convinced that the greater threat to liberty comes from the right in the form of civil liberties violations rather than from the left in the form of economic regulation. After rightfully pointing…
Balko leans left
Radley Balko is joining the ACLU after being convinced that the greater threat to liberty comes from the right in the form of civil liberties violations rather than from the left in the form of economic regulation. After rightfully pointing…
Actually, the United States didn’t ever threaten to scuttle the U.S.-Chile FTA if Chile wouldn’t support us on the Security Council. I’m quite sure of this. Where did you get your information?
Certainly George W. Bush sucks, but Nadine Strossen might be one of the most evil persons in America. With all the millions of advocacy groups out there couldn’t you choose another one?
viagra
viagra online
cialis
If only there were a way to start a city or an army made up of lovers and the boys they love! Theirs would be the best possible system of society, for they would hold back from all that is shameful, and seek honor in each others eyes. Even a few of them, in battle side by side, wouldconquer the world, Id say. For a man in love would never allow his loved one, of all people, to seehim leaving ranks or dropping weapons. Hed rather die a thousand deaths! And as for leaving the boy behind, or not coming to his aid in danger - why, no one is so base that true love could not inspire him with courage, and make him as brave as if hed been born a hero.Car RentalNational Car RentalWeddingEnterprise Car RentalBudget Car RentalOnline ReservationThrifty Car RentalAlamo Car RentalDiscount Car Hire
Car rental in UK
Car rental in US
CruisesCheap Flights to USACheap Flights to AustraliaCheap Flights to CanadaCheap Flights to New YorkFlightsVoIPVoIPCheap Flights to floridaCheap Flights to bangkokCheap Flights to sydneyCheap Flights to dubaiCheap Flights to hawaiiCheap Flights to melbourne
I like this site:
http://hgh.free2000.org/
don\’t you?
Talking of Celebrities and movies jaime pressly comes to mind. Even karen mcdougal is very beautiful but nothing compare to paula abdul or gauge. The hollywood if full od sulty and sext actresses like rachel hunter, leann rimes, Jessica Biel and eliza dushku. Some guys like you are only interseted in marure cinema artists like victoria silvstedt. Talking about XXX movies another movie with title XXX comes to mind featuring vin diesel. I wished nina hartley would have been there or even meg ryan and drew barrymoreBut anyways I am pretty happy for nicole richie and johnny depp, as they have settled will in their careers. Independence day actor will smith or titanic fame singer celine dion are well settled, but nobody can put down mandy moore or sky lopez. I used to love punk hence I started watching pink. But who is this new teen actress hillary duff. I know anna kournikova is a tennis star and alicia keys is a beautiful actress janet jackson but never heard of anna nicole smith who married an old guy to get his money. But this is Hollywood Miss .brooke burke. Hey Mrs. Smith, angelina jolie is here too with lindsay lohan and amanda peet cheering for great performace of amitabh Bachchan in movie Sarkar, Indian version of Godfather. What!, you wanted brandon routh and chyna too be part of the show. Ha Ha Ha! .. Wait howard stern read this. Matrix star keanu reeves seems busy these days, even oliver martinez, olsen twins, sung hi lee and tom hanks are thick in action.
Outsourcing
Flowers
Businesscards
Wifi
http://www.la-ringtones.com/mp3/ ringtones site. Best free samsung ringtones, Cingular ringtones and more, Ringtones for free. from website .
superb blog
car insuranc car insuranc