hugo

After having a Republican President who embraced expanding the federal government's role in medicine and education and who proposed massive budget deficits in a time of prosperity (making the current even more massive deficits in a recession both politically and economically (under the direction of Lord Keynes) inevitable and now we had the Republicans nominating a liberal in the last election and overwhelmingly rejected the one candidate whose words and votes actually show he is for not only fighting the expansionary plans of the socialists but actually reducing the size of government. Of course, he is an extremist. Let me quote Barry Goldwater "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice". Now, of course, the Republicans seem infatuated with a governor who put a tax on oil companies, reducing employment, so she could give every Alaskan a welfare check.

63 Buick Special.

The proof is in the pudding; what have the conservatives accomplished in the last 75 years besides slow down the ride toward serfdom? On the main point of this thesis Hayek is 100% correct. History has proven it. As for the minor point, raised by TJ, on what to call proponents of liberty, I, like Hayek, am not satisfied with the most popular current term, libertarian, I prefer describing myself as a classical liberal. Like Hayek, I often use the term libertarian because most people, who are not total ignoramouses, somewhat understand the term. When you state you are any kind of liberal most people think you are a damn socialist. Sadly, people are really stupid nowadays, no longer do books by economists make the best seller lists. People prefer the sophomoric crapola of Hannity, Limbaugh or Franken. I suggest people turn off talk radio and read three books. "The Road to Serfdom" by Hayek, "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman, and "The Affluent Society" By J.K. Galbraith. The first two are by classical liberals the third by a devout Keynesian, then you will at least understand the economic arguments between the two main schools of economics in the Western world. More info: I'll have to read "The Constitution of Liberty".

Before commenting farther you need to read and comprehend the article. Hayek is using the term liberal in the classical sense, where liberals were the ones who believed in limited government. A quick explanation, when Hayek refers ro socialists he is referring to the modern liberal, when he refers to liberals he is referring to a group that is most often called libertarian today. He makes that clear in the article. The socialists stole the word liberal in America and have now sullied the word. From the article: A little info on Hayek:

Conservativism simply slows down the ride down the road to serfdom. We need to make a u-turn.

Institut HAYEK - Why I Am Not a Conservative

I was a worthless, drunken pervert, then I got married and had a kid...and....er...uh.....nevermind.

Ya find a lot more naked women at the Satan festivals.

The reason it is newsworthy is just last week there was a flyover at a Satan and the UN gathering.

And the man behind the "Contract with America, Newt Gingrinch, would make a hell of a lot better President than Sarah "The Commie" Palin.

Don't forget it was GW's expansion of medicaid that gave Obama the opportunity to declare our current healthcare system is unsustainable. Don't forget when we compare US vs. Canada healthcare systems we are simply comparing a 70% socialist system against a 90% socialist system.

My God, she is evil. I think I have found my soulmate. I would say that Palin and the midgets porn video is going to be tough for a "conservative" candidate to get past.

She looks better in a dress than I do.

Sarah was a big spending liberal whose main claim to fame was taxing production, and eliminating jobs, so she could give every Alaskan a welfare check. Off with her head.

I never screwed Ted, Snafu is lying.

I screwed Sarah last week in a cheap hotel room in Bogata. She gives a lousy blowjob.

The fact is we are comparing our current system which is 60-70% government controlled to systems that are 95% government controlled. We need to go backwards to the medical system Americans enjoyed a half-century ago with the benefits of modern technology. To add to RO's list. Repeal the Kefauver Amendment that greatly increases the costs of bringing a new drug to market. Reduce the restrictions on individuals practicing medicine. Eliminate the need to obtain prescriptions for drugs.

Basic economic laws 1) There is no free good 2) So-called free goods have to be rationed.

Howard was a dumbass.

Trying to remember what I used to put in the crankcase of my '63 Buick.

We have truly gone too far down the road to serfdom. It truly saddens me to watch "conservatives" embrace socialism. I sure won't support someone who catered to a whole state of welfare bums.

Any taxes would be low, and would pay for the legitimate functions of government. Police and fire protection and certain public works such as levies, dams and roads. I would never tax industry to give people a check for doing nothing.

Hugo Chavez and Sarah Palin are ideological soulmates when it comes to distributing oil wealth.

It is not. For some reason "conservatives" at this site love socialism, as long as it is at the state level under Republicans.

I oppose socialism at the federal level, at the state level and at the local level. I oppose socialism regardless of which party is implementing it. A quite consistent principled stance. The fact a state can engage in immoral socialist practices does not mean it should. I certainly will not support the wolves in sheep clothing that make up most of the Republican Party.