Come on, Forbes!

In response to my last post about 10 days ago, one comment asked in part, "Who the hell is Frustrated Republican?"

Here's who:

Because their guiding economic philosophy, no matter how they try to disguise it, is socialism and because they rank the state as superior to the individual, Democratic politicians are supposed to get policy wrong.  I'm bothered when Dems propose legislation which infringes my individual liberties, but not at all surprised.

When Republicans get it wrong, however, I lose it.  Unfortunately, today far too many Republican leaders deviate from what are supposed to be our core principles... from now on, they will typically be the ones in the crosshairs of this blogger.

A great current example of such frustration comes not from an elected official, but Rich Karlgaard, publisher of Forbes Magazine, which is supposed to "get" free market economics.  His his recent article, "How Moral is Capitalism?" is the type of thing that causes me to tear my hair out.

He seemingly starts off the article well enough, describing how capitalism "delivers the goods."  But this isn't news; over the last 30 years in particular, the fact that capitalism works has become self-evident. What we need to most effectively argue now is why free markets are right, which is because they are synonymous with individual liberty.

At the very least, I wish these "defenders" of capitalism wouldn't launch into discussions of how much government is the right amount, as Karlgaard does... in doing so, they tacitly endorse the Democrat argument that government has any role at all in certain areas of our economy.  A related real-world example is W's prescription drug plan; in creating it, he established the precedent that government belongs there in the first place; he gave HillaryCare one of the big pillars it couldn't win for itself, advanced our lurch toward European-style welfare economics and virtually assured that government will be permamnetly involved in presciption drugs because such programs never die, only expand.

This from a Republican President and a Republican Congress-- UGH!!

Well, it's not just our politicians... Forbes' Karlgaard proved that all of us on the right have some soul-searching to do, that after our November butt-kicking we're all in need of re-examining our core philosophies.

Comments

[One Who Knows]

obtuse
One entry found for obtuse.

Main Entry: ob·tuse
Pronunciation: äb-'tüs, &b-, -'tyüs
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): ob·tus·er; -est
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin obtusus blunt, dull, from past participle of obtundere to beat against, blunt, from ob- against + tundere to beat -- more at OB-, CONTUSION
1 a : not pointed or acute : BLUNT b (1) of an angle : exceeding 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees (2) : having an obtuse angle -- see TRIANGLE illustration c of a leaf : rounded at the free end
2 a : lacking sharpness or quickness of sensibility or intellect : INSENSITIVE, STUPID b : difficult to comprehend : not clear or precise in thought or expression
synonym see DULL
- ob·tuse·ly adverb
- ob·tuse·ness noun

[Dead on]

My new favorite blogger! I'm so sick Arnold and his health care plan, these huge deficits and big government Republicans in general.

I don't know what One Who Knows' problem is. You are dead on, FR! Go!

[Publius]

Every time I hear or read someone described as "obtuse" I think of the Tim Robbins character in Shawshank.

[Blog Junkie]

How Moral is Capitalism?

How Moral is taking everything that hard working folks make and giving it to people that either aren't here legally or don't try to get jobs because the Dems will keep giving them handouts? How moral is that?

Where is John Galt when we need him?

[That's right]

You're so right, Blog Junkie, and Frustrated Republican is clearly your type of guy (or gal). Mine, too.

It wasn't the most well-written post I've seen but the message was clear.

One Who Knows is the one who is obtuse.