No Apology: Romney Likes America, Likely To Run In 2012

So, Mitt Romney's got a new book....

All you lovers of policy are going to really like his book and probably already like Romney.

The book's core, however, are his proposals on everything from national security to the economy, from health care to energy and from entitlements to education.

The policy prescriptions laid out in the book are too many to recount in full. But the broad strokes are a hard line on foreign policy coupled with a bit more ideological flexibility on the domestic front.

The overarching concept which animates Romney's book is the idea the United States must remain strong for the world to remain free.

Drawing on his years as a management consultant, Romney warns that the United States must remain the world's leading economic and military power or else global leadership will fall to the Chinese, the Russians, or the Jihadists -- each of which is described by Romney as pursuing an authoritarian vision for world domination.

I'm one of those who happens to believe that individual freedom is inextricably linked to economic freedom & prosperity. Just as prosperity enhances individual freedom, prosperity enhances national freedom--specifically, from malicious influences (think Chinese debt) and to combat world threats (Jihadism, & pocket dictators like Chavez, Ahmadinejad, & Jong-il).

To this point, I agree with Romney:

Obama comes under extended criticism for seeing himself as "the world's great bridge builder and synthesizer." Rather than talk of the world's "common interests" as Obama is fond of doing, Romney thinks it is more useful to focus on the prevalence of evil and to stand by traditional allies.

"I submit that it is vital to believe in evil -- it is neither confused nor deterred by vacuous introspection," writes Romney.

Like John Bolton said at CPAC 2010 (Part 1, Part 2--watch 'em both, they're fantastic), President Obama was not prepared to be President in January 2008 and he remains unprepared one year later. Yesterday's post with its quote by James Corum (thanks to Matt for posting that) perfectly sums up Obama's foreign policy incoherence and incompetence.

Romney's policy proposals will also please all you Pigou Clubbers out there:

On the domestic front, Romney articulates a conservative vision while managing to show a measure of independence from the Hard Right.

Although anti-tax activists typically oppose revenue raisers of any kind, even if they are intended as a replacement for other taxes, Romney's book flirts with the idea of a new tax on gas or carbon which would be paired with a reduction in the payroll tax. Romney's book does not actually embrace a "tax swap" but he nevertheless describes it as currently being the best game-changing strategy for achieving energy security.

I remain open minded, if skeptical both of the desirability of "energy independence" (quotes used to mean "whatever that means") and the efficacy in addressing such perceived problems with pigovian taxes.

Romney favored (and favors) TARP as administered by Hank Paulson, but not Tim Geithner. Regardless of how it was administered under one vs. the other, it created far too much opportunity for so-called Crony Capitalism.

When it comes to the Wall Street bailout which is loathed by many Tea Party activists, Romney defends Hank Paulson and credits President Bush's former Treasury Secretary with saving the US financial system. Romney then goes on to criticizes Tim Geithner, President Obama's Treasury secretary, for the way in which he has administered the Toxic Asset Relief Program.

If we're still debating the causes, effects, etc., of the Great Depression, it's safe to say we'll be arguing the relative merits of the sundry causes & effects of the Credit Crunch. Put me on the side of the people who think it wouldn't have been Apocalypse to let the bad banks fail.

Continuing a trend we've seen in interviews and debates about ObamaCare, in his book Romney defends RomneyCare by using the Federalism argument (state vs. federal administration). I leave it to you as to whether or not you find his argument persuasive.

When it comes to health care reform, Romney curries favor with conservatives by pointing out that the universal health-care plan he championed in Massachusetts deviated from Obama's proposal in that it did not include a public option. At the same time, Romney defends the idea of states, like Massachusetts, requiring individuals to purchase coverage even though some conservatives view such a mandate as an assault on individual liberty.

It appears Romney is correcting an error (perceived or otherwise) made by the McCain campaign during the election in allowing that Obama cared more about the "middle-class" (those who consider themselves to be a part of it or who would eventually like to be a part of it).

The "Fair Tax," a proposal to replace all federal taxes with a 23 percent tax on consumption plus an annual prebate, is popular among some conservative activists. In 2008, the proposal helped power former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to his win over Romney in the Iowa Republican caucuses.

Romney explains in his book, however, that he opposes the Fair Tax because it might be evaded and he fears it would lead to a big reduction in taxes on the super rich like Bill Gates and higher taxes on the middle class.

Instead, Romney favors a series of more incremental tax changes including the elimination of personal taxes on dividends, interest, and capital gains for middle-income families.

I remember reading fivethirtyeight.com and wondering at Nate Silver's obsession with the words "middle class" in Obama's speeches & debate performance.

On an unrelated note, it is one of the more telling signs of the Obama administration's perpetual campaign machine that they are literally obsessed with polling buzz words and remain convinced that they just have to educate stupid Americans on healthcare such that they will eventually understand and agree with the Democrat Party's desire to universalize everything.

Read the rest of the article here.

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

An Incoherent Foreign Policy

Jake is currently mid-flight across the Atlantic, and I am posting on his behalf.

James Corum, quoted in today's WSJ:

The Bush administration got a lot of things wrong—but at least they usually had some idea of who America's adversaries were and who America's friends were. For example, Bush's policy of maintaining the special relationship with Britain was a simple recognition of the close bonds of alliance, friendship and interests that the British and Americans have had since World War I.

In contrast, [President] Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are apparently clueless about some of the most basic aspects of foreign policy: supporting one's friends and fencing in one's adversaries. The declaration of neutrality on the issue of the sovereignty of the Falklands issued by the U.S. State Department is clear proof of the uselessness of the Obama administration.

In the grand scheme of things it makes little sense for America to give moral support to the Kirchner government in Argentina. [President Cristina] Kirchner is no friend of the U.S. and Kirchner's government is in deep domestic trouble for its gross mismanagement of the economy and its attempts to suppress the press criticism of the regime at home. One has to wonder what benefit America gets out of hurting Britain on this issue. Perhaps Obama thinks that the more Leftist Latin American regimes will somehow approve of the U.S. If that is the case, he is truly mistaken, as most Latin American nations dislike the Argentinians, and have little sympathy for the mess Argentina got into over the Falklands.

But this mess is just typical of the drift in U.S. foreign policy—if one can say that it even HAS a coherent foreign policy these days. . . . In his first year in office Obama made numerous apologies for America's past to the Third Worlds, he effusively greeted the Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, he bowed low to the Saudi ruler, and called for a "reset" of relationships with Russia—all the while implying that America was at fault for all these problems. At the same time he rudely undermined the security of America's Eastern European allies by cancelling the ballistic missile defense with no notice and no prior discussion, he failed to push for a free trade agreement with Columbia—America's strongest ally in South America—and he supported Chavez's allies when they tried (luckily unsuccessfully) to unseat a democratic and pro-U.S. government in Honduras.

Glenn Beck At CPAC 2010

See for yourself what all the complaints/hype was about.

I liked it.

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

CPAC 2010 Day 3

Like any good conference, CPAC builds up to the the last day. The first speaker of the morning is Rick Santorum, beloved of social conservatives, hated by the left. After Santorum is Andrew Breitbart, scourge of Hollywood and ACORN. Then comes a panel with Jonah Goldberg and so on from there.

Last year Matt and I commuted from our friend Michele's place every day of the conference. I had pneumonia at the time and waking up early enough to make it to the conference (and keeping the late hours that we did) just about killed me. The combination of no pneumonia and staying on site has made for a much more pleasant experience. Even at that, we're all still tired.

Per usual, I'll update the blog throughout the day, but for the up-to-the-minute, blow-by-blow stuff, follow the various twitter feeds here, here, here, & here.

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

CPAC 2010 Day 2 (UPDATED)

UPDATE 11:22p EST: You must watch these two videos of Andrew Breitbart. The man was one of my and Matt's favorite speakers last year at CPAC and he's had a great 2009, helping James O'Keefe & Hannah Giles to break the ACORN tapes. This video is classic Breitbart and exposes the liberal media.

UPDATE 6:29p EST: I'm just going to state right up front: I do not understand the appeal of Ron Paul. People chant "End the Fed" throughout his speech and... what do they propose to do once they accomplish this pipe dream? Ron Paul's speech? He revises the last 150 years of American history in favor of his brand of libertarianism/conservatism.

This isn't to say that there isn't some stuff to recommend Mr. Paul. For example: I stand with him in his defence of the Constitution. I just can't abide his more outlandish proposals, like ending the Fed.

The best speakers we listened to today were, in no particular order, Mike Pence, John Ashcroft, and Viet Dinh. Mike Pence delivered a speech that some people described as the best in CPAC history. I wouldn't go that far as there've been a lot of good speakers here over the year, but it was very good. Pence could very well run for and win the Presidency in 2012. I would not be shocked.

John Ashcroft (see my tweets) delivered a passionate defense of Bush-era legal handling of enemy combatants, etc. Given that Obama has mostly continued the Bush legal legacy, I'd say Ashcroft and co. have mostly been vindicated.

Viet Dinh was the man we did not know who delivered the goods. He was involved in a debate about relationship between liberty & security and he soundly (to my mind) whipped Bob Barr. Dinh's knowledge of relevant legislation and American legal history was on full display. I suggest you do a Google search and read what you can by Mr. Dinh.

The biggest disappointment, for me, was Tim Pawlenty. As the Old Man said, "the message was right, the delivery just left something to be desired." He did not have the charisma, presence, and speaking ability of Mitt Romney or Mike Pence. Granted, these largely superficial things are not everything, but it would be nice to have someone who can make a more compelling case for conservative principles. His speech was largely a rambling stream of consciousness that was at times too self congratulatory. This is the type of thing that bothers me from Obama. It bothers me no less when the person is a Republican. If a candidate is going to speak about his or her life, I want it to be in a self-deprecating manner. They should let someone else talk them up.

I begin today's CPAC blog post the same way I ended yesterday's, with a link to a Politico article about Mitt Romney.

Everyone who ever writes or talks about Romney's chances in 2012 always pounds on his Massachusetts healthcare plan and rightly so. It has elements of a government takeover of healthcare that conservatives to not like. Romney pitches it as an issue wherein states ought to be able to choose what they want to do, rather than the federal government. This is an interesting response, using the conservative argument for federalism to defend his unpopular-among-conservatives healthcare plan.

CPACers are a hard charging bunch. They conference hard during the day and party hard through the night and then somehow, many of them make it up the next morning in time for the 8:30a speaker.

Rather than going to one of the many CPAC-related soirees, we went to dinner at Pot Belly, a local's favorite sandwich establishment and followed that up with the Syracuse vs Georgetown men's college basketball game--a game won by Syracuse. We were collectively struck by how well Syracuse traveled for the game as they literally occupied the entire upper portion of the arena and the Orange was spread liberally throughout the rest of the Verizon Center. The only problem was, none of us AT&T users could get our cell phones to work. I don't know whether to blame Verizon or AT&T.

Like yesterday, the best CPAC coverage from us and everyone else is on that Twitter. Click here for me, here for Matt, and here for the #CPAC10 aggregator.

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

CPAC 2010 Day 1 (UPDATED)

UPDATE 4:52p EST: Here's a good report by Ben Smith of Politico on Mitt's speech.

MATT UPDATE: 4:52p EST Before heading off to dinner and the Georgetown v. Syracuse basketball game with friends, we're finishing the day with Wayne LaPierre, NRA lobbyist extraordinaire.

LaPierre clearly knows how to argue guns. And although libs may claim he obfuscates the issues, certainly nobody better understands the unintended consequences of gun control. He is excellent, and worth every dollar he makes from the NRA.

As Jake mentioned, who could possibly make a surprise visit tomorrow that would surpass today's visits? Regardless, I'm looking forward to Tim Pawlenty and John Ashcroft tomorrow. I'll even admit some anticipation for Ron Paul, if only to snicker at his more outrageous proposals, and to hear a hundred "End the Fed!" shouts from the crowd. Those Paul people, they're crazy.

UPDATE 3:52p EST We're watching a video of John Boehner's greatest hits. The music? Kings of Leon. I can't imagine K of L are conservatives (or would like their music to be used by a Republican) but if so, good on them.

Matt and I just walked around the exhibition hall and ran into a person who looked like an overweight and short Michael Barone. He is Barone's doppleganger, right down to the signature glasses. The only reason we knew for sure it wasn't Barone is that we saw him last year.

Everybody is talking about Dick Cheney, Scott Brown, & Mitt Romney. Friday & Saturday have a lot of work to do to match today's performance.

I'm beginning to understand why so many writers tend to be overweight. There are all kinds of complementary drinks and snacks for media-types and they mostly consist of soda, chips, & cookies. The only thing that save me is that I have a year's worth of student living (& eating) between events.

UPDATE 2:27p EST I'm trying to update using my iPhone. Apologies in advance for any errors/typos (more than usual). Romney killed it today at CPAC. Matt and I were especially impressed with his command and narrative us of American history to link cnservative ideals to American Founders. The whole speech bears reading, that section in particular. At one point he called liberal democrats neo-monarchists for their desire to command and order more of American life. This was a particularly powerful historical allusion.

From a purely political calculation perspective: Linking with MA Senate winner Scott Brown is a good way to put Romeny squarely on the side of the Tea Party movement--no mean feat when you are the former governor of a liberal state.

UPDATE 11:51am EST: Rubio rocked, DeMint rocked, Jason Mattera drew applause, laughter, and offended the left and somehow, Dick Armey re-established himself in the center of the Tea Party and conservative movement. God Bless Texas.

Blogger registration opened 8 minutes ago. I guess that means it's time to get up and get ready. Last year I turned up at the site of CPAC 2009 the day before it began and the place was pretty dead. Yes, they broke attendance records, but like I told my dad yesterday (and my brother agreed), it was more about conservative commiseration than anything else.

We'd been beaten pretty badly and everybody just wanted to get together and trade stories and talk about how optimistic Ronald Reagan had always been and how he would have seen the light at the end of the tunnel.

CPAC 2010 is an entirely different atmosphere.

Yesterday when we arrived Matt saw Wayne Lapierre as we pulled up in our cab and the guy looked like he was spoiling for a fight. All the other CPAC 2010 attendees in the hotel were excited and pregnant with anticipation. Ditto every comment I've read in every blog and tweet and in all the email listservs.

What a difference a year makes.

Your first reading assignment is this Politico article, linked on Drudge. I'll be updating the blog throughout the day, but as I mentioned in my last post, the place to get the most up-to-the-minute information is on that Twitter. Click here for my stuff and here for Matt's. We'll attend every possible speaker and panel we can and post our quick reactions as fast as we can.

We wish you could be here, but since you aren't, we're glad to share our thoughts and impressions via the interweb.

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

CPAC 2010, Here We Come

As many of you know, tomorrow I fly to Washington DC for a week of research and a few days of CPAC 2010. I'm fortunate in that the place wherein most of my American research will take place also happens to be the location of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference--a conference I first attended with my brother last year.

What is even more serendipitous is the fact that next week is reading week at my university. Given that I teach a seminar and conduct an office hour every Tuesday, this means I don't have to find someone to fill in.

It's like they planned the reading week so I could attend CPAC 2010, or something.

Anyway, early tomorrow I fly London to Detroit and thence to Reagan National Airport (appropriately) where I will meet up with my old man and brother and head on over to the site of CPAC 2010 where we will spend the next three days. We are, the three of us, credentialed bloggers for the event (yes, they'll give them to practically anyone) and will be chronicling our experience via this blog and something with which some of you youngsters are already familiar--that Twitter.

As far as I know, none of the CPAC authorities did anything about my suggestion from last year (that there be designated blogging locations in each of the conference rooms, complete with a table and internets connectivity), which means the most constant, up-to-the-minute information about CPAC will be had through my and everyone else's Twitter account.

You can follow me, here and Matt, here. If/when the aforementioned Old Man gets a twitter account, I'll list that one too.

As I say, we'll post here at lybberty.com, but we'll really be posting on that twitter, so follow us.

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.

Weekly Links: NYC, Neoconservatism, Secret Intelligence, John Bolton, Teh Panty Bomber, Tea Parties, Chessmasters, & Paul Krugman

In any given week, I collect so many links to good articles on which I'd like to opine, I'm unable to get to all of them. Thus, these weekly link dumps. If you're looking for something good to read, read one or all of these, listed in no particular order of priority.

(these aren't all political)

In NYC, old real estate families are getting back in the biz after the bubble burst on the new comers. (h/t Scott L.)

Father/dean of neoconservatism, Norman Podhoretz, answers questions about his ideology and why Jews tend to be liberal, among other things. (h/t Matt L. or Scott L.)

The Binyam Mohamed trial last week in London resulted in the release of secret American intel given to their British sources. According to high ranking British sources whom I personally questioned, the real concern is over the day to day sharing of intelligence between the middle management types. This will inevitably affect the long term development of intelligence.

My favorite ex-diplomat, John Bolton, makes the case for a military strike against Iran to preempt their development of a nuke.

Michael Mukasey, former US Attorney General, breaks down, point by point, why the administration's handling of the "panty bomber" did not have to be handled the way it was--Miranda rights, etc.

Glenn Reynolds reports on what he saw and heard at the Tea Party convention.

Russian opposition leader, Garry Kasparov, updates and warns us about current US policy towards Russia & Iran.

Finally, Paul Krugman makes an interesting argument on the one hand, if the Euro is to succeed, for greater EU political union and on the other hand, against the hubris of adopting an single currency. (h/t Taylor B.)

If you have tips, questions, comments or suggestions, email me at lybberty@gmail.com.