"The Party of NO!"

Let's be real clear on something. The problem arises when the Republicans are known as anything other than "the party of no." There is a reason Republicans and Democrats are known as conservatives and liberals. I'll make my point with salt. To add it conservatively you risk blandness, but you can add more to taste later. To add it liberally you may luck out, but you risk ruining the whole meal. So in politics we need guys to come up and say "it needs salt," but you need the other guys to come up and say, "let me have a look at that." It's a balance. Republicans aren't Libertarians, they believe that there are times when the government can offer a solution, but they are supposed to be slow to come to that conclusion.

Siding first with Capitalism doesn't deny a problem, it denies the understanding of a proper solution. Siding with Capitalism assumes that if there is a need or a desire that someone will figure out a way to fulfill it. If the solution is poor it will fail and disappear. This cycle continues until there are desirable solutions at hand. A solution too liberal can be bad while also restricting or inhibiting a quality solution in the private sector. Unfortunately a bad, or outdated, solution made by the government is hard to turn away from. This can be seen with the Social Security system. It's far inferior to other methods, and yet people have paid into it their whole lives. It would be completely unfair to say they are out of luck, but it currently seems unfair to those paying into it now. For this reason we should be incredibly slow to assume that the government has the best ideas.

Let's say for example that a charismatic politician decides that he wants to end poverty. He comes up with this grand scheme and figures out that he can reduce the poverty level in America to virtually 0%. All he needs is a trillion dollar budget and we will have a record that will leave the rest of the world in a state of awe. It takes someone with a conservative mind to stay, hey wait a minute, that tax burden may destroy our economy and leave us all in a bread line. Simply put, naming a problem doesn't create a solution. A poor solution via stage one thinking can leave us in deeper water then we started in.

The same can be said about a health care bill so bad that they have to bribe Democrats with hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars just to pass it. You need people questioning what will happen to the state of health care if the government decides to take over the insurance business. How will this effect us in the long term? What will this do to the overall quality of healthcare? Or, How will this effect our economy. Are we sure that we are making the right decision, since backtracking seems to be nearly impossible in the world of government? It doesn't mean that national healthcare is a bad idea. It's a great idea, it simply assumes that the right solution has not been presented, and a commitment so large and expensive needs to be handled with extreme caution.

So to all the Republicans out there, when you hear the title "the party of no," be proud. The politicians are doing their job.