He backtracked from that position a little, but he won't ever be a small government guy and his most recent weekly newsletter really highlights the core ideological differences between the casual GOP voters and the party leaders.
Anuzis opens it with the Detroit bankruptcy and a rousing "It will be back!" statement we here in Michigan have been hearing for 20 years or so. In that paragraph, he notes,
people are hoping that bankruptcy, the largest of its kind on U.S.
soil, will give Detroit another chance. But that'll remain wishful
thinking until Detroit reverses its backward economic strategy.
city that showers subsidies on well-connected businesses while
thwarting individual entrepreneurs and ignoring basic services is
writing its obituary — not its second act."
A thought I agree with on the surface. But remember, his wing of the party just pushed through the farm subsidy bill that hands out the overwhelming majority of other people's money to the biggest corporate farmers in America, not to the family farmers.
And they got it passed by taking food stamps out of the package.
As I wrote about here, that's just the opposite of what we the little people want. While the Democrats wanted both sides of the original bill , the corporate subsidies and the food stamps. We the fiscal conservatives want business (and I am including farming in that definition) to be profitable without subsidies.
We also want people to live without subsidies, but like it or not there is a percentage of the voters who think that the federal government should indeed hand out food. And quashing food stamps in a sluggish economy, especially while handing out record setting amounts of cash to millionaire farmers, isn't a smart move politically. But are we really supposed to believe that there is a huge voting bloc that wants the federal government to give money to corporate America while slashing welfare?
No, we aren't. We are just supposed mindlessly cheer on the fact that the Democrats didn't get their food stamps passed while ignoring the fact that the GOP just handed truckloads of our children's cash to corporate America. These guys might be Republicans, but they are not conservatives.
About the Obama decision to delay implementing the employer requirement of Obamacare, Anuzis goes on to say:
(Obama) has abandoned Congress and is seeking to rule through administrative agencies and executive orders that, in our system of government, make him as near to a despot as we are ever likely to get – knock wood.
Right. Ignoring 2013 Congress is bad. We agree on that. But when 2008 Congress twice voted not to send Detroit any money, and President Bush said he didn't care, that he was taking the money from TARP regardless, where was Anuzis?
Oh, that's right. He was singing the praises of the man smart enough to save Detroit.
He then goes on to discuss some different variations of the Flat Tax. Great plan, except that he's already talking about preserving the Earned Income Credit, mortgage deductions, health insurance deductions, and blah blah blah. With leaders like him in charge, the "simpler" tax system will end up even more convoluted than what we currently suffer.
Next, Anuzis mentions the 2016 primary season:
See anybody there that excites you? Yeah, me either.
Anuzis then goes on to attack Jim DeMint in is new position as the president of The Heritage Foundation ("DeMint is diminishing one of the party’s most powerful intellectual engines by turning it into a group taking cheap shots at Republicans"), defending John Boehner, ("He’s a conservative, certainly, but also an institutionalist, an old-school politician who likes to do deals; as his months-long effort to concoct a “grand bargain” with Obama on the budget showed, he has an interest, at 63, in leaving a legacy of bipartisan accomplishments behind him,") and pointing out that the electorate isn't blaming the GOP for the sluggish economy any longer.
It's like they are perfectly content for the 2016 GOP campaign slogan to be "At least we aren't Democrats on the surface!"
But there is hope. Change can be a slow process, but think about this: When I first became aware of Anuzis, he was Chairman of the MI GOP. He then moved up from there to the GOP Committeeman seat. But then things started changing. He ran for RNC chair and lost. He lost his reelection to the committee seat, too. Heck, most of the candidates he endorses these days lose too.
But this match is just beginning. Wrestling power away from this wing of the party won't be easy, but make no mistake - these are the people we need to remove completely from power. Republicans like Anuzis talk the talk, but once they win the power back they do not hesitate to abandon the principles of the electorate.
Yesterday in Houston, Black Panther leader Quanell X organized a traffic-stop protest of the "Not Guilty" verdict found in the murder trial of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed a 17 year old youth, Trayvon Martin.
I'm always a fan of a good protest but sometimes their objectives elude me. Antiwar protests may have been a Democrat sham but at least they had a stated objective. But as with the Occupy protests, the Trayvon protestors seem to be representing anger without any particular goal.
I hear they want "justice" but what exactly is that? Do they want to eliminate our trial-by-jury system and replace it with mob rule? Trial by professional, politically connected jurors perhaps? Maybe trial by media? Verdicts rendered by elected officials?
Or perhaps they simply want to take away the right to plead self-defense?
And even more confusing to me? What are the people of Houston supposed to do about a verdict that was rendered in a Florida court?
If you're not familiar with the name, consider yourself lucky. Jennifer Rubin is a neocon writer the Washington Post has annointed as their token conservative. As with most neoconservatives, she's not a fan of small government-minded politics, and therefore not a fan of Rand Paul.
Lately, her distaste for Paul has been extending into kind of a stalkerish ex-girlfriend series of diatribes. I'm not going to link to her, partly because I'm too lazy but primarily because I don't want to, but trust me when I say that she wrote anti-Rand Paul attack columns on July 8th, 9th, 10th, 12th, and 14th. Clearly a woman obsessed with protecting the spoils that international largesse is bringing to a chosen few.
Today, she took it one step even farther left:
So Kentucky Dems, listen up: Forget about Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.),
who is going to win reelection by a country mile. Start working on
finding a conservative Democrat to run against Paul in 2016. By then,
the people of Kentucky may have had all they can stand of Rand Paul.
There you have it. A high profile voice of the left-leaning wing of the GOP calling for a Democrat ouster of a sitting Republican. That would be especially funny if it wasn't something they consistently accuse our wing of the party of doing.
Now that I'm thinking about it, she even looks a little like a certain sitting Democrat president, doesn't she?
The story is here, but this is the kind of stuff that I don't like about Republicans.
The original Farm Bill was 100% pork. Pork for the corporate farmers in the form of subsidies, and pork for the voters in the form of food stamps.
The GOP base had a fit, so the GOP split the bill into two pieces. Our brand of conservative would dictate cutting the corporate subsidies now, and start whittling the food programs back when the economy got better.
A compromise might have been to scale both programs back.
But I can only assume that our brand of conservative doesn't want the corporate farm money in their campaign coffers or something, so the GOP did exactly the worst thing possible - they passed the corporate welfare part of the bill, and cut out the food assistance for the citizens.
I swear, it's like they want to live up to the stereotypes the Democrats brand them with.
In the never ending examples of government inefficiency, NBC's Washington, D.C. affiliate is reporting that it currently takes between 3 and 6 months to get an appointment to take the Driver's License road test.
So, the government has given itself a monopoly on issuing licenses, and still manage to totally botch the system. That's what a lack of competition gets you. Every time.
The solution? Allow people to pay to take the test sooner, and to their credit, that's exactly what they're doing. Soon some private driving schools will be allowed to give the test for a $100 fee. Meaning, I'm sure, that the government will be getting some portion of that for doing absolutely nothing. Brilliant plan, if i do say so myself.
Of course, the best solution would be to allow the schools to administer the test for any fee they wanted, and we'd soon see lots of them providing it for no extra charge to their students. But if they did it that way, who would fund the pensions of the DMV workers?
Remember the Journolist scandal, where a large group of liberal writers conspired to coordinate their messages against conservatives in the media?
Apparently the neoconservatives have one too. Of course, I'm not invited, but what else besides a coordinated attack would explain the quantity and timing of today's pieces on Jack Hunter and by proxy, Rand Paul?
Here's a partial list;
Rachel Weiner, Published: July 9, 2013 at 12:05 pm, Washington Post Rand Paul aide has history of racial comments
Jennifer Rubin, Published: July 9, 2013 at 12:15 pm, Washington Post Rand Paul’s newest problem
Jonathon Chait, Published: July 9, 2013 at 11:49 AM, New York Magazine Racists Love Ron and Rand Paul for Some Reason
Alex Seitz-Wald, Published: Jul 9, 2013 08:30 AM PST, Salon.com Rand Paul’s team has another white supremacist
Seth Mandel, Published: Jul 9, 2013, 12:50 PM, CommentaryMagazine.com Rand Paul, the “Southern Avenger,” and the End of the Benefit of the Doubt
That's only a partial list, but it seems to be an awfully big coincidence that so many 'independent thinkers" decided upon the same theme, and published within 45 minutes of each other.
I hope Rand Paul notice this. So far, he's shown to be a much better politician than his dad, so i haven't lost all faith yet. But we can't win this battle if we're always playing defense, something the GOP in general never seems to acknowledge.
But that isn't what this is. Don't believe me? Look at the related posts featured at the bottom. Just yesterday, Paul was all over the news for attacking the neocons on foreign policy.
Again, I'm not big on coincidences. It sure looks to me like he has them playing defense, which is a good thing. It would be better if we had more media on our side, but nobody ever said the big government would go gently into that good night.
As we saw with the Hagel confirmation, the GOP Trotskyites do not hesitate to team up with the Democrats on their anti-small government messaging, and if all Paul ever did was react, then the battle would be lost. Again.
But again, that's not what this is.
Anybody for starting up Journoliberty? Let us know how we can help.
I think it's kind of cute that people still think the government is there to help them.
On a personal note, I learned this exact lesson. When I was 20, living in my own apartment, I came home from work and found I had been broken into. I too had been taught not to enter the home, in case the burglars were still there.
In my case, my neighbor finally came home from work and did a walk-through for me, but the police never showed up.
As I've grown older, I've come to believe they really aren't interested in solving crimes unless they get to wave their guns around. Instead, they focus on raising revenue via traffic tickets and asset confiscation.