Why is it that everyone who disagrees with an interventionist “Wilsonian” Foreign Policy all of a sudden a liberal elitist? How is being against an interventionist foreign policy, building billion dollar embassies in Pakistan and Afghanistan that we can’t afford, and maintain 700 bases worldwide not conservative? I believe in a strong national defense, which why I want the “National Guard” defending the Country and not Baghdad. I’m against “socialized” medicine and cap and trade, but what needs to be understood is that when Government grows in one direction it grows in all directions. Government didn’t shrink under George W. Bush it grew, and chances are even if Sara Palin did enter the White House it would still grow. We’ve been playing this game of “liberal”, “conservaitve, Democrat and Republican for so long that no one checked to see if anything changed. Government will grow under Obama, and it would also grow under Palin, and Jindal. So the question is how is that conservative?

I would also ask how do conservatives plan to win Future Elections when they can’t even maintain their old alliances. How can you win, when you accuse your fellow conservatives, and libertarians of being liberals, and RINOs? Something else to consider, a Foreign Policy of Caution, and Restraint, especially in a time of soaring deficits and mounting debt is not liberal, but common sense. Spreading Democracy around the world is a nice idea if we had unlimited resources, and we weren’t depended on Foreign Capital to keep us afloat. But unfortunately we are dependent on Foreign Capital, we are spending more then we take in, and that combined with an over-extended Military, and trillion dollar domestic budget is a recipe for danger. Proceed with Caution…
“History will probably find that Conservatives of my ilk will be called Liberals.”
- Barry Goldwater

All this is well and good, but I noticed in his book – which for some strange reason the publishers felt needed a picture of Levin right on the cover – he doesn’t really back up arguments against changing health care with any substance. He doesn’t address that there are 36 other countries that come before America in life expectancy with Georgia, Brunei, and the United Arab Emirates as our low-ranking neighbors. He doesn’t account for exactly how socialist nations like France must have a much worse health care system than ours, even though the French are, on average, living 7 – 10 yrs longer than Americans, along with Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, and Italy. Having lived in Europe for a while, I can attest to the existence of a myth here – that Europeans wish they had our health care system. Nothing could be further from the truth. I was hard pressed to meet a European who was remotely interested in trading their system for ours.

Guys like Levin and his supporters are good Americans, in practice, meaning they exercise their rights to free speech and patriotic discourse to the fullest, which should be taken as a good example by the rest of us. They mean well, and they truly believe what they believe. But I’m not sure I understand the chronic aggrandizing of our health care system as it is now. And I think it would probably benefit them to stop writing poorly-written books – the kind that are perused as the “non-fiction” read of the summer by semi-consciously illiterate masses right after that seventh or eighth re-read of The Da Vinci Code.

C’mon, now. Levin is an uneducated, ignorant moron who has never read anything, let alone an opposing viewpoint. Meanwhile, the omnipotent wunderkind blogger who has read Kirk and Nisbet is going to show us the way.

A taste of his own medicine, however ineffectual it is.

I’m still trying to figure out why that’s important.

So this makes you about, what, 21, 22 years old?