I think that this is a key time for definition by conservatives.
Do we stand for a limited Federal government — in which case we oppose this massive Orwellian plan?
Or do we simply stand for limited government in a few areas, but a massive Federal government in any area that can be plausibly tied, even through attenuation, to security and law enforcement?
If the latter, then the debate between progressives and conservatives is NOT whether there should be a massive Federal government that has tentacles into every aspect of Americans' lives, but rather what the underpinning of such massive Federal intrusion should be — security (for conservatives) and social welfare (by progressives).
It is always good to get your comments. I fully agree.