Claremont McKenna scholar William Voegeli's at it again over at the Salvatori Center. In The Los Angeles Times, he writes about our obsession with Reagan and how the G.O.P. is endanger of joining the political wilderness. He's right.
He frames the issue neatly on what conservatives can do to roll back the welfare state.
Rather than waiting for the next Ronald Reagan, conservatives might do their cause more good by pressing liberals to answer these questions: What would be enough? When does the welfare state reach the point that it doesn't need one more budget increase? One more new program? One more percentage point of the GDP?Voegeli's right on the money. People intuitively understand limits. If you think about it, limits are the one things that unites political issues. Arguably, the Democrats won because they understand that there was
- a limit to the corruption Americans could tolerate
- a limit to the criminal mismanagement of Iraq
- a limit to the spending that the G.O.P. Congress could get away with.