Christian Liberty
03-24-2014, 10:44 AM
I don't really put Mike Lee in the same category as Amash, Massie, and to a lesser extent Rand Paul, but I found this to be an interesting read nonetheless:
http://reformedlibertarian.com/blog/define-limited-government/
Excerpt (Note, this is not the beginning of the article, but its the part that most effectively summarizes it) quoted below:
But Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Thomas Massie, none of these “limited government” heroes have, contrary to Ron Paul, advocated the elimination of the income tax altogether. There are some politicians, called extremists by The New York Times and other officially vetted and approved opinion outlets, who might indicate that the income tax should be replaced by the Fair Tax, but this is meaningless. And stupid. And they call themselves Constitutionalists!
Moreover, while “audit the Fed” has, off and on, been praised, how often is “End the Fed” pushed? Some want to overturn many EPA and OSHA and FDA regulations, but how much more effective would it be to defund them? To eliminate them? To tell a good ole bureaucrat executive that Taco Bell is hiring?
Hardly a need to mention the battle against private property that takes place in both foreign armed wars and the war on drugs. “Limited Government” folks support these too.
“Common Core is terrible!”, cries these folks. Yes, and so is the very existance of a Federal Department of Education, State Departments of Education, County Departments of the same, and the very idea of public education at all. If government, as the limited government folks posit, is about protection of life and property, why shrink back at the suggestion of a completely free market in education? Again, they might nod their heads: “I agree, I’ve been supportive of vouchers in the past.”
Response: “Indeed you have. But is that not socialism too –albeit in a different form?”
Now, I don’t mind the label limited government per se. I just want to know why nobody has any clue what “limited” means.
http://reformedlibertarian.com/blog/define-limited-government/
Excerpt (Note, this is not the beginning of the article, but its the part that most effectively summarizes it) quoted below:
But Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Thomas Massie, none of these “limited government” heroes have, contrary to Ron Paul, advocated the elimination of the income tax altogether. There are some politicians, called extremists by The New York Times and other officially vetted and approved opinion outlets, who might indicate that the income tax should be replaced by the Fair Tax, but this is meaningless. And stupid. And they call themselves Constitutionalists!
Moreover, while “audit the Fed” has, off and on, been praised, how often is “End the Fed” pushed? Some want to overturn many EPA and OSHA and FDA regulations, but how much more effective would it be to defund them? To eliminate them? To tell a good ole bureaucrat executive that Taco Bell is hiring?
Hardly a need to mention the battle against private property that takes place in both foreign armed wars and the war on drugs. “Limited Government” folks support these too.
“Common Core is terrible!”, cries these folks. Yes, and so is the very existance of a Federal Department of Education, State Departments of Education, County Departments of the same, and the very idea of public education at all. If government, as the limited government folks posit, is about protection of life and property, why shrink back at the suggestion of a completely free market in education? Again, they might nod their heads: “I agree, I’ve been supportive of vouchers in the past.”
Response: “Indeed you have. But is that not socialism too –albeit in a different form?”
Now, I don’t mind the label limited government per se. I just want to know why nobody has any clue what “limited” means.