Sometimes I wish that conservatives would make an effort to be logically consistent. I suppose some do, but most seem to have no problem switching the basis for their arguments depending upon what outcome they desire. Here are some examples that have bugged me lately:
- $$$ as speech
When there is an effort to limit the effect of money on politics, conservatives yell “freedom of speech.”
But, when groups like MoveOn.org want to air political ads during the Super Bowl, it seems that money isn’t good enough to buy the right to speak!
Similarly, corporations feel that their speech should have the same rights as individuals, while advocacy organizations are told (by Congress and the Supreme Court) that their speech has an undue influence on the political process.
- Small Government
When government wants to enact programs to care for society’s neediest, conservatives yell about the dangers of big government.
But, the same conservatives seem to have no problem with military spending on a scale outranking that of all other nations combined!
(Calpundit makes a similar point.)
- States Rights
When government wants to enforce civil rights, conservative rail against centralized power.
But then they threaten to veto legislation aimed at limiting centralized power. Not to mention similar hypocrisy on the right of a state supreme court to order an electoral recount, and the right of voters to pass a referendum which allows sick people to grow marijuana for medical purposes.
Conservatives have no problem pretending that the war in Iraq was never about an “immanent threat” posed by WMDs, but insist that it was about democracy all along.
And yet, not only do they continue to support undemocratic regimes in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere, but when Taiwan asserts its right to hold democratic referendums, they take China’s side.