13 year old at CPAC: Conservatism is not Republican

[Found this one via HotAir]

Speaking at CPAC, a remarkably well spoken 13 year old young man named Jonathan Krohn gets his three minutes to attempt to define conservatism.  He does a pretty good job, and not just for a 13 year old.

He makes the point that I try to make: that conservatism does not mean Republican, the former being a philosophy and the latter being a “shell” as he called it.  And the Republicans certainly proved under Bush (spending like drunken liberals) that their party label does not necessarily guarantee conservatism in the way that it once did.  Of course, when I have this discussion about the relationship between conservative and Republican it is typically in the context of trying to figure out what the word “conservative” really means and whether I am one.  In the grand scheme of things, I would consider myself to be conservative but I do disagree with the Republicans on many topics.  I am slowly ruminating my way to a post about what “Conservative” means and how “conservatives” need to expand their tent a little bit if they are going to counter the welfare state collectivism of the Democrats.

The young Mr Krohn also appeared on FoxNews, talking about 2012.  He is more optimistic than I, but he has some good points:

As always, I hope that Newt will run in 2012.  I still have my Newt ’08 stickers and I may cut out the “08” and patch in “12”.  Can you imagine how the debates would have been different had Obama gone up against the brilliant, articulate, and relevantly-educated former speaker?  That would have been fun.

4 responses to “13 year old at CPAC: Conservatism is not Republican

  1. Looks like a prime example for the pros of retrospective abortion

  2. How classy – a young man articulates a political philosophy with which you disagree and your immediate response is simply that things would be better if the boy was dead. Disgusting. I guess that the end *always* justifies the means for the Left.

    I have not seen you comment on one of my posts in a while. I figured that you had taken a demanding gig at Daily Kos or something. Either that or I am not doing a good enough job of pissing you off – I will try harder.

  3. Apparently, futiledemocracy must be about anarchy and the absence of civilization, given the low-level thinking expressed in this post.

  4. Indeed, par for the course from that guy. Just the name of his blog shows his distain for freedom.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s