Triumph of the Redistributionist Right

The title of Patrick Chisholm’s latest article at The Christian Science Monitor actually credits the left, as opposed to my title. Both are absolutely correct, as there ain’t a dime’s worth …

From the article:

Trends are decidedly in favor of that quintessential leftist goal: massive redistribution of wealth.

Republicans’ capture of both Congress and the White House was, understandably, a demoralizing blow to the left. But the latter can take solace that “Republican” is no longer synonymous with spending restraint, free markets, and other ideals of the political right.

My wife (who was an avowed Clinton hater) and I went out last night. On the way home, she commented that she never thought she’d live to hear herself say it, but she’d prefer the Clinton days to what we have now with Republicans in control of everything. Chisholm provides some of the reasons:

During the first five years of President Bush’s presidency, nondefense discretionary spending (i.e., spending decided on an annual basis) rose 27.9 percent, far more than the 1.9 percent growth during President Clinton’s first five years, according to the libertarian Reason Foundation. And according to Citizens Against Government Waste, the number of congressional “pork barrel” projects under Republican leadership during fiscal 2005 was 13,997, more than 10 times that of 1994.

Discretionary spending is dwarfed by mandatory spending – spending that cannot be changed without changing the laws. Shifting demographics combined with an inability to change those laws virtually ensures that, through programs such as Social Security and Medicare, America’s workers will be forced to redistribute a larger and larger portion of their income to other Americans in the coming decades.

The way I see it is that we have but three choices. One can vote Democrat if they generally favor big government. One can vote Republican if they favor radical approaches to an even bigger government. With control of the both houses of Congress and the White House locked up for years, they have no one to blame but themselves. Republicans had their chance and lied through their teeth.

Fortunately, there is the Libertarian Party — although state legislatures and the judicial branch do everything they can to prevent its existence. I saw the writing on the wall a few years ago and switched parties. If I was a small government Republican and reading Chisholm’s article, I’d be making the jump today.

6 Comments
  1. By today’s GOP standards only is Ron Paul a RINO. In contrast, I would say that the rest of the Republican party are really RINOs.

  2. I agree with your wife. It’s been Christmas in DC for the last 5 years. I think they made a deal: W doesn’t veto any stupid thing congress wants to do and they look the other way while he rapes our rights. For the GOP it certainly has been a “Grand Old Party” the last 5 years. As soon as I can get by the voter registration office I intend to change mine to Libertarian.

  3. Ron Paul’s really a RINO, (Republican In Name Only). He ran for President on the Libertarian ticket about three races back.

    Yeah, I know several Libertarians (Helped one run for local office) that ran on the LP ticket, lost miserably, then went on to win later because they had an “R” next to their name on the ballot despite the fact that they were saying the SAME THINGS from the previous election.

    {confused}

  4. Indeed; I’ve been voting R for awhile, but with current spending trends (and more importantly, spying on citizens and detaining people without warrants), I can no longer vote Republican in good conscience. When out of power, the GOP was an alliance between libertarians and religious conservatives. Once they got power, they abandoned the libertarians.

    Next election I’ll have to choose between voting Libertarian or Dem…

%d bloggers like this: