Sweet music to libertarian ears...From Eric Dondero:
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, campaigning in Iowa the other day, took a staunchly libertarian stance in favor of eliminating funding for PBS and the NEA.
The headline at the Hollywood Reporter screams out: "Mitt Romney Claims He'll Cut Off Funding for PBS"
none of the Republican candidates for president are quite as enamored with public funding for the arts as the Democrats are, but Mitt Romney was making it an issue Wednesday, claiming he'll even cut off PBS.CNN reports (via WPTZ.com):
Romney went on to say in his remarks:Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney told supporters in Iowa Wednesday about his plan to shut down funding for programs like PBS.
According to the Hollywood Reporter, Romney laid out intentions to "stop certain programs" and include advertisements on the children's show "Sesame Street."
"Close them. Turn 'em off. Even some you like," he said of his plan.
"You might say, 'I like the National Endowment for the Arts.' I do," Romney said. "I like PBS. We subsidize PBS. Look, I'm going to stop that. I'm going to say that PBS is going to have to have advertisements."
"I happen to think it's immoral for us to keep spending money we don't have, and passing on to our kids our obligations," Romney told supporters at Homer's Deli in Clinton, Iowa. "My test is, is a program so critical that it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it."Editor's note - Ending NPR, PBS, and NEA funding has been a very top domestic priority for this website and the overrall libertarian Republican movement.
16 comments:
This is good. If he means it.
And why should you care? Romney's a "squish," in your eyes, right? There is absolutely nothing he could ever do that would win your approval.
So, quite frankly, I'm not impressed by your attempt to sound reasonable.
It's like George W. Bush. The guy proposes partial privatization of Social Security in 2005. Do you EVER hear any purist libertarians thanking him for that?
Fuuuuuuuuuck no. You people are pathetic.
He doesn't he's a flip-flopper. Newt Gingrich promised this de-funding in 1994 but I guess he forgot as he had to wash his hair.
Back to Romney's threats: he'd have to be president. To do that he has to win the GOP nomination. Then he has to beat Barack Obama. Then he has to keep his word. I don't believe he's going to manage any of that.
Ron Paul in 2012!
Alan Turin
And Ron Paul is a duplicitous parasite running in a party he despises.
Chuck, keep it up: the way you and Eric convince this tiny part of the internet world that the war party are liars is great.
Your payments from LewRockwell.com to maintain the "idiot curtain" will be forthcoming.
Ron Paul in 2012.
Alan Turin
Keep eating those paint chips, squirt.
I'll be waiting for your non-apology for all the delusional bullshit you've spread around here on behalf of your Dear Leader, Pope Ron Paul the First.
"My test is, is a program so critical that it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it."
Then why won't he support cuts to Medicare?
"And Ron Paul is a duplicitous parasite running in a party he despises."
And you seem to care more about this party than you do the country. Fuck the GOP! Is Romney seriously the best they can do?!?!?
Let the Kool Aid drinkers have their moment Chuck. Ron Paul will go down shortly afterwaters and all these supposed liberty lovers will have to find someone else to blindly follow because these fucking morons obviously can't think for themselves.
"Is Romney seriously the best they can do?"
It's their party. They're free to nominate whomever they choose.
The matter of fact manner in which Romney is being denigrated is mindless and juvenile. Romney is a damn good candidate with a pretty damn good record overall. He'll be running against a jug-eared, buck-toothed Communist shitbag next year. He'll win. The country will be better off for it.
The dumb fuck fringe will always remain the dumb fuck fringe.
"Your payments from LewRockwell.com to maintain the "idiot curtain" will be forthcoming."
That's right, keep support that racist confederate motherfucker Al because you're obviously buying into his paleoconservative bullshit. Why don't you stop wasting our time and go back to downloading your white supremacist webcasts Pat Buchanan and David Duke.
The irony is that if Ron Paul wasn't so fucking blind in his loyalty to that despicable bastard Rockwell, they'd have no reason to question anything in his character. Now you've got this newsletter shit out there.
Let me ask you Al, how you can conclude that your ole' buddy Lew's views on race are libertarian?
"The country will be better off for it."
Do you honestly think it matters that much? Seriously? Do you honestly think that Romney's got the balls to take on the ticking debt time as opposed to worrying about cutting a paltry $20 million from PBS?
Do you honestly think Romney would even come close to proposing reforms on par with Mitch Daniels? Chris Christie? Or would he blame all his shortcomings on being surrounded by Democrats? Fuck, Gary Johnson governed a state that was 2 to 1 Democrat and he accomplished a whole hell of a lot more than Romney ever did in Massachusetts.
Eric, I'm with Jiggles. If Romney is serious, good for him.
As for Bush, we do thank him for the miracle of Alito and a few paltry libertarian attempts from his Administration.
If you want me to fill a few pages of anti-libertarian "accomplishments" - that is to say tyrannical centralization - from the Bush years, hey, I can do it.
"Do you honestly think it matters that much?"
Do I think it matters if the country is better off instead of worse off?
Yes. Nothing matters more. Nothing.
Dan,
Alan has a distorted (oddly myopic) view of history with the irony being that his historical "facts" comport with leftist (statist and fascist) sources. This nonsense on Newt and de-funding... forgetting, of course, on the bigger gains Gingrich made and on the difficult context in which he made them. (Don't know where Turin was during history class, but gee! his hair smells terrific.)
My problem with this is I just don't buy it. Romney, the politician and perhaps the man (though I am dubious about the last) might actually be for shutting those things down. The problem is that half or more of his fans are liberal of the more moderate variety. They would absolute oppose any such action. At which point Romney would simply shrug and suggest this promise was hasty and back out.
Not going to happen with Romney.
Thank goodness we don't elect a King.
Post a Comment