State

P.J. O'Rourke, who says he became a conservative on the birth of his first child--hint, hint, Apple Strudel (Ah, the naive ideas we held when we were young.)--certainly is an entertaining writer. For example, there's this: Conservatives' 28-year opportunity to fix the moral and practical boundaries of government is gone, says O'Rourke. I can't disagree.

I put the blame for this in part on Ronald Reagan leaving office with a very high approval rating, 86 or 88 percent, and not using some of this capital on making social security something one owns and can pass on to one's descendants. I got this from Charles Krauthammer. Yes, the third rail and all that, but making it truly an owned asset for people rather than a "pay as you go" scheme that is clearly unsustainable and violates the tenants of private property: if one dies early--and it can be racial, too, as black men have a shorter lifespan--their accrued money doesn't go to help the spouse and kids. What's that about?

That would have potentially been a paradigm shift in favor of the Ownership Society that George Bush did so little to further when we were on the brink of something profoundly libertarian.

Oh, well. I've already preordered John Derbyshire's book. Even if George Friedman says America will become even more dominant this century than last, she still feels as if she's fraying, Balkanizing.

Holy Diver

O'Rourke is a valid voice for the conservatives. I'm not saying I agree with everything he says, but he makes great observations based on reality and history. He brings facts to debate and has a grasp of his political philosophy.

Too bad nobody in the party is smart enough to listen to him.

Instead they flock to Limbaugh and Glen Beck. They hear the call of 'visionaries' like Malkin and Dr. Laura....



good luck with that.

apple strudel

That will never happen.

You can't lazily dismiss an ideology you disagree with as naive and be taken seriously at the same time.

The people don't like the ownership society since it quickly leaves them out in the cold as the few accumulate more and more. That's why you lost your window (if in fact you have). Go back and study your history and you'll find that laissez faire capitalism and its attendant ownership society in the 19th and early 20th century is what gave rise to the popularity of communism in the early half of the last century and the implementation of progressive policies following world war 2, thus leading to the golden age of the middle class.

That said, of course going after Clinton for almost nothing was a mistake, but not for the reasons you think. It was a mistake because that and the Supreme Court were pretty much the things that lead to the crystallization of conservative values in the form of W getting elected and him not having the sense to at least try and pretend like he wasn't constantly screwing the people over. Basically you guys revealed too much and people caught on to the act.