Book Review: The Conservatarian Manifesto

The Conservatarian Manifesto: Where Conservative and Libertarian Politics MeetThe Conservatarian Manifesto: Where Conservative and Libertarian Politics Meet by Charles C. W. Cooke

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I would have to say one of the best political books in a long time. Charles Cooke, writer for National Review, clearly and openly debates the struggle of the Conservative and Libertarian wings within the Republican Party. This dense but quick read covers the history of the current Conservative Debate and how it is dominated by Social Conservatives, Fiscal Conservatives and Libertarians. The crux of his book is based around the idea that Libertarians can take advantage of both Social And Fiscal challenges in the Republican party by shifting the party narrative and embracing more moderate voters that are turned off by Progressive Democrats. Cooke builds his argument by using major writers in the Conservative media and Libertarian Writers.

One of the big short falls is that the majority of the narrative was written before the 2014 mid-terms and may come off as dated by the time it is published. A great plan for the second edition would be to go back and look at the progress of the Conservatarian Narrator in 2016 as the Presidential election approaches. I particularly enjoyed his narratives on Abortion and Foreign Policy as it relates to debates between both parties. Cooke lays out how both parties are simply using Abortion as a means to speak to their base instead of addressing the general public opinion and that foreign policy has been hijacked by Imperialist in both parties. Cooke is clearly in the Conservative camp but has a heavy leanings towards the Libertarian views as it is a means to break away from Social Conservatives who no longer align with moderate conservatives.

Anyone interested in how a millennial conservative is thinking about the power struggle between Neo-cons and Paleo-cons would be interested in this good read. It reads like a Libertarian primer written for the National Review, because that who he is and what he writes. Others have knocked it for being this but that is what makes the book great for the moment. It feels like Barry Goldwater‘s spirit is in the room as he would more than likely be with Cooke as Conservatarian.

ARC Read and Reviewed for NetGalley.

View all my reviews

Hope in Failed Political Promises

>

HILLARY APPOINTMENT: THE AUDACITY OF BROKEN PROMISES at DickMorris.com

The words of King Louis XVI seem appropriate, “Oh Lord protect us, for we rule too young.”

The lack of new “true” leadership in the Democratic party should scare all Conservatives, weather AuH2O or Reaganites. We need to unify as a group and force the GOP to follow true plank policies or demand that the party restate who and what they believe. The lack of a unified definition of belief lost many to the Obama Cult of Personality faster than any election in history. The negative campaign of why you should hate Obama, and a lack of why you should vote for McCain, completely collapsed the GOP’s ability to win campaigns throughout the country.

Neither McCain or Obama were the man I wanted for the job. This is a common experience for many this election cycle and the Washington politics are no longer valid as status quo. This was not a core voter election, nor was it a centrist election. This was an election of tricky disillusionment and lacked ethical responsibility.  The next four years will continue to be difficult but could result in Phoenix effect within the Republican party.

Excerpts below highlight the same problem that I have expressed before and why I fear an Obama administration.

A Clinton appointment would replace the audacity of hope with the audacity to shamelessly break campaign promises.Hillary Clinton is the epitome of the entrenched Washington political establishment that Obama so effectively challenged and so thoroughly disdained. That’s what makes her consideration so puzzling. But it’s not just her old politics that should immediately disqualify her. With her out-of-control husband freelancing with foreign governments to raise money for his cronies, his foundation, and for speaking fees for himself, the potential for serious conflicts of interest are incalculable and dangerous. We don’t know precisely what the former president has been up to; it’s all secret. For more than eight years, Bill Clinton has adamantly refused to disclose the fat-cat donors to his library and foundation. Because of a computer error in the Clinton Library, the New York Sun inadvertently learned that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Dubai, the U.A.E, Kuwait, and Morocco have chipped in. But what about other governments or businesses? Because one thing is for sure: Bill definitely won’t change and there’s no telling who else he’s been hitting up for money.

He’s lobbied for other favorite projects, too. After he was paid $800,000 for speeches by Colombian Free Trade interests, the former president picked up the phone and called several democratic congressmen to advocate passage of the treaty. He’s never registered as a lobbyist or a foreign agent, but that hasn’t stopped him. Nor will it in the future.

The potential problems are obvious.

The husband of a Secretary of State cannot be in business with the head of a foreign country with growing interests in the U.S.

Instead of a rogue co-president, Clinton would be a rogue co-Secretary of State. And that’s something Obama can’t afford.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]