Smitty sees a way for Mitt Romney to claim the Federalist high ground:

[I]f you argue a libertarian hand at the Federal level, keeping to the 10th Amendment and re-constituting the States as managers for the existing entitlement programs, you needn’t waste breath arguing that Socialism really sucks pond water. You can just say, “Hey, not to my taste. Those that want Euro-socialism should move to the Northeast. Those that want capitalism should move to Texas. Express yourself at your State’s capitol.”

And while Massachusetts is finding that health care costs a hell of a lot more than they expected (surprise!), well, there’s no need to nationalize those costs:

Mitt can contend that the style of RomneyCare should be expanded to reclaim from DC all of the education, mortgage and Social Security services that have been un-Constitutionally appropriated by the Federal government.

Not that Mitt’s going to do any such thing, necessarily, but it might forestall the wielding of the mighty RINO Stamp. Maybe.


1 comment

  1. smitty »

    16 April 2010 · 9:36 pm

    My biggest point is that Conservatives, including Romney, could conserve political capital by arguing for a libertarian, _federal_ Federal government, and blow off any negative assertions about Socialism as such.

RSS feed for comments on this post