Maybe Afghanistan is a Good Idea After All

Norquist Decries Lack Of Conservative Debate On Afghanistan

Norquist said conservatives recognize the weakness of the arguments for the war, which is why they don’t often make them.

He scoffed at the notion that fighting two wars was making American stronger. “Being tied up there does not advance American power,” he said. “If you’ve got a fist in the tar baby Iraq and you’ve got a fist in the tar baby Afghanistan, then who’s afraid of you?”

I kid. Norquist’s argument is sound.  The combination of opportunity cost and direct cost is also my main problem with the war in Afghanistan.

But man it sucks to be on the same side as this man.  Grover Norquist has done more than anyone (other than Dick Cheney) over the past two decades to harm the position and future of the United States.  His consistent advocacy of the “starve the beast” philosophy is directly responsible for our dramatic increases in deficits and debt — which are more than 70% due to tax cuts.  Indeed, the cumulative costs of Norquist-promoted irresponsible deficit-financed tax cuts dwarfs the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan combined. Norquist-inspired policies has weakened us internationally, may yet cripple our economy, and have imposed a wholly unjustified burden on future generations.

The man is not just amoral, but actively immoral.  I’d call him a traitor, except he has not meant to give aid and comfort to our enemies, but solely to his own greed.   In some ways, that is actually worse.  Traitors sometimes believe in ideals greater than themselves.