Save Your Pets.Com Stock, Boys, the '90s Will Rise Again

Remember the days when it didn't seem unusual to read about a conservative like this one?

[Via Daniel McCarthy.]

Comments

[mediageek]

"It's sad when you look back at the Clinton days and think, boy, those were the good old conservative spending days," he said."

Yeah, pretty much sums up how I feel about it, too. Even given that Clinton was probably the most antagonistic president to my pet issue ever. Otherwise, I find myself pining for the good ol' days when everyone was up in arms over a blowjob, and not, say, wiretapping people without warrants, suspending their rights, and then trying them in secret courts.

[Hakluyt]

mediageek,

Well, there was the issue of the FBI background files.

[Mike]

"I'm not all that happy with the growth of government under the Republicans," said Kunkel. "I truly believe that government in a lot of ways has grown bigger under (President) Bush.

Wow. Now there's a guy who doesn't pull any punches.

[zeiner]

"It's sad when you look back at the Clinton days and think, boy, those were the good old conservative spending days..."

That's a great quote.

[Hakluyt]

mediageek,

And of course there was the "Clipper Chip" and several internet content laws that Clinton signed and promoted were struck down.

[Hakluyt]

I'm saying of course that the 1990s were no libertarian idyll.

[mediageek]

No, they weren't. But at the same time, they certainly weren't the assembly line of statism we seem to have today.

More like a cottage industry.

[independent worm]

I'm saying of course that the 1990s were no libertarian idyll.

Nobody would argue they were. I think the part about "it's sad when you look back at Clinton", as spoken by a Kentucky Republican, was meant to convey that. But the original point was that by comparison you'd think it was.

At the time I thought Clinton was the worst president of my lifetime. Now he seems like George Washington. By comparison.

The Clipper Chip is almost -- almost -- quaint by comparison with what Bush and his men have done.

[Hakluyt]

independent worm,

My point is that we tend to gloss over a lot of the crap from the 1990s when comparing Bush to Clinton. IMHO its more of an issue-specific function to me, rather than a difference in overall approach by either guy.

[Hakluyt]

Of course I readily admit that I am a cynical individual.

[dhex]

some of clinton's actions laid the pathway for our current tree of bitter fruit.

effective death penalty act?

one uptick, however, is that i get to hold clinton's "you can't love you country and hate your government" schtick over all my bushitler friends, at least the ones still pretending to be democrats.

[R C Dean]

But at the same time, they certainly weren't the assembly line of statism we seem to have today.

Echelon, anyone?

Socialized health care?

Repeal of some Reagan-era tax cuts?

Assault weapons ban?

Elian Gonzalez? Waco?

And lets not forget some rather . . . interesting . . . coincidences in who got an IRS proctology exam and who didn't.

[happyjuggler0]

At the time I thought Clinton was the worst president of my lifetime. Now he seems like George Washington. By comparison

Wow. I think Clinton was our second least worst president in my lifetime (born mid sixties), although Ford actually has bragging rights for the second least worst too. But given time I suspect he'd of done some damage. I have a lot of contempt for the first President Bush, both now and then. Nixon and Carter I have major issues with due to their embrace of inflation and price controls, not to mention the usual beefs with fascist-like behaviour and feebleness respectively.

H.W. Bush is clearly our worst president since FDR in my opinion, at least until his son comes under consideration. Now Clinton would have won that title if he had managed to screw over our health care system a la Canada like he wanted to, but he didn't.

I give zero points for intentions, zero points for words, and tons of points for actions.

[Hakluyt]

dhex,

Yes, that really was a blow to the right of habeas corpus.

[mediageek]

RC Dean, I'm not disagreeing with you one iota with regard to the stuff Clinton did.

The ban on so-called "assault weapons" was a huge thing to me. And that other stuff is arguably even bigger than that.

But with the Democrats, at least I knew what I was getting. I expected to be pissed off and angry at the stuff they were doing. By contrast, the Republicans have reneged on everything the party supposedly stands for, from small government to lower taxes, to more personal liberty (at least with regard to some things.)

[nmg]

He home-schools his children; is against abortion and more taxes; believes government spends too much money; backs the Second Amendment and gun ownership rights; and decries Republican-backed legislation such as the Patriot Act, the federal anti-terrorism bill he says is a danger to American's civil rights.

Typical. Even the most libertarian-leaning folks usually have a blind spot when it comes to their comittment to others' freedoms... sad.

nmg

[Lowdog]

I pretty pro-choice, nmg, but can you honestly say that if we had more folks like this guy (provided he would actually do anything to rein in the the gov't and protect civil rights) that we wouldn't be a helluva lot better off?

[Roger Shrubber]

If this guy wasn't a Bible-thumper, I'd donate some time and money to his campaign.

40ish MWM from central Ohio seeks "that government governs best which governs least"/non christian recon candidate to donate time and $ to. Willing to travel to IN, KY, WV, PA. No wolverines please.

[independent worm]

Typical. Even the most libertarian-leaning folks usually have a blind spot when it comes to their comittment to others' freedoms... sad

Only if you assume the only relevant "other" who has rights is the pregnant woman.

If you assume that the fetus is also a rights-having "other", than you can in fact conclude that there is a legitimate clash of individual rights there, and could also then conclude that you favor the rights of the fetus.

Either position can be held by a libertarian (or anyone at all), depending on one's assumption about who is a rights-having individual and who isn't.

[dead_elvis]

Lest anyone get too optimistic, here's what's running in another state:

http://blogfiles.wfmu.org/HM/twilight.mov

[Ken Shultz]

Typical. Even the most libertarian-leaning folks usually have a blind spot when it comes to their comittment to others' freedoms... sad.

Is the Libertarian Party "libertarian-leaning" enough for you?

...Seriously folks, religious fanatics or atheist fanatics, I dunno which one's worse.

[nmg]

I'm not an atheist fanatic. I'm a personal liberty fanatic. And this guy is all for limiting the influence of government and valuing your liberty.... *unless* you are making choices that he finds distasteful or offensive. It's just pure luck that most choices don't offend him so he sounds libertarian. But he's NOT libertarian.

He's perfectly fine with the act of limiting freedoms he finds objectionable, just like other politicans. It just happens that his list of objectionable freedoms is shorter than other politicans but his philosophy is the same.

nmg

[Warren]

When the fuck will we stop hearing about Republicans that say nice things before they're elected?! Before 2000 I thought Republicans were every bit as bad as Democrats. Now I know they are worse, but that's just until the Dem's get their turn at the plate. I'm sure they can sink to new lows.

[JD]

I have nothing to say except that this makes me somewhat prouder to be of (partly, for one generation) of Northern Kentuckian descent. Florence, y'all!

[joe]

I used to think conservatives like Kunkel were the most ruthless, dangerous people on the American political scene.

I have recently been disabused of that notion.

[joe]

Does anyone else remember the Pets.com dog's appearance with Triumph the Insult Comic Dog on Conan O'Brien?

Heh heh heh heh.