Wanting less government means wanting it in all areas


July 1, 2003

I've asked the question before, and I have a feeling I will be asking this question again: Are right-wing Republicans on crack?

Before I get angry letters from people who have "Rush is Right" bumper stickers and whatnot claiming that I am a pinko commie leftist poodle molester, let me say that I have nothing against Republicans or conservatives or even conservative Republicans. In fact, I agree with them on a lot of levels.

Despite the fact that I am alleged pinko commie leftist poodle molester, I tend to believe that there's too much government in a lot of areas. Government should serve to provide society with things that people or small groups of people can't do in an orderly fashion -- things like schools, roads, medical licensing rules, etc. And I agree that there's a lot of pork in government that could be, and should be, slashed.

So, me and my conservative GOP homies can kick back, yo yo, word, and agree on these facts.

But when it comes to personal and private matters, many of my conservative GOP homies shift gears faster than a frightened trucker on amphetamines.

I think that in cases of adult consensual sexual behavior, early-term abortions and privacy, there can be too much government. But some of these same people who stand up and say we can't have taxes or welfare or universal health care or government agencies that compete with business are the FIRST people to step up and try to stick the government's nose in people's private lives.

This was evident last week after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to overturn a Texas law against sodomy. This ruling apparently invalidated the laws forbidding same-sex oral and anal sex in four states and laws forbidding sodomy for anybody in nine others. Anyone who truly believes in smaller, unobtrusive government -- or that whole right to privacy part of the Bill of Rights -- would joyously hail such a decision, if anything giving pause to the fact that one-third of the Supreme Court actually think it's OK that the government formerly could get into the consensual sex lives of adults.

But, no. After the ruling, so many so-called conservatives stood up and claimed that, dammit, the government should be able to punish people for consensual acts behind closed doors.

This, from Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., the Senate majority leader, during an interview in which he also declared support for a constitutional amendment (i.e. more government) banning gay marriage:

"I have this fear that this zone of privacy that we all want protected in our own homes is gradually -- or I'm concerned about the potential for it gradually being encroached upon, where criminal activity within the home would in some way be condoned," Frist told ABC's "This Week." "And I'm thinking of -- whether it's prostitution or illegal commercial drug activity in the home -- to have the courts come in, in this zzone of privacy, and begin to define it gives me some concern."

So, wait a sec. He's basically saying that because people can now legally have whatever kind of consensual sex they want in private, as long as nobody is harmed, he is afraid the government will condone CRIMES? And therefore he supports MORE GOVERNMENT to "stop" this?

Meanwhile, on a local level, this more/less government hypocrisy can be readily found. Many of the 15 GOP Assembly members who are holding up the Nevada budget in the name of less government are folks who support things like the Protection of Marriage initiative, abortion laws and other things creating more government.

This is like claiming to be a vegetarian while having hamburgers every morning for breakfast. Either you're for less government, or you aren't.

I can honestly say that I am in favor of less government, wherever possible. Considering the hypocrisy shown by many right-wing GOPers, they can't say that. Either they're lying bastards, or they're on crack.

Jimmy Boegle is a fifth-generation Nevadan in exile in Arizona who would join the Libertarian Party if they weren't so whacked. Jimmy's column appears here Tuesdays, and he can be reached via e-mail at jiboegle@stanfordalumni.org.

1