In the wake of Scott Brown’s decision to cast a preliminary vote in support of Obama’s second stimulus bill, I’d like to point out that, although I did run a television commercial from the Tea Party Express PAC, which supported Scott Brown, I never really pushed for Scott Brown at Daily Uprising. I just couldn’t get excited about him. Why not? Here are my reasons:

In my experience, those who call themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal” are often looking to create a political identity that is least offensive to the largest number of people. It’s the type of thing young lawyers might say at the firm cocktail party when politics comes up and partners might be listening. Certainly, it is possible and even logically consistent to be both of those things, but those who identify themselves that way are too often seeking broad based popularity that is inconsistent with actually being a principled fiscal conservative. My libertarian friends and fellow bloggers who actually best personify what it means to be “fiscally conservative and socially liberal” don’t typically have a need to pause to distinguish themselves as socially liberal when arguing for free markets. To be a real fiscal conservative in today’s world you have to be ready to make some unpleasant decisions, bruise some egos, and end up making enemies who will put your political career in jeopardy.

Other socially liberal politicians who’ve defined themselves as fiscally conservative are Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnie is in the papers today bashing the tea party movement and praising Obama’s first stimulus plan.

Some probably think I’m being harsh on Brown for his initial vote… because a tax cut was involved. Payroll tax relief for businesses who hire new employees is a form of tax cut, but it isn’t one that would please Hayek or Von Mises. When government tries to direct decision-making in any markets including the labor market, we get unintended consequences and end up with less efficient means of production. Just as social services welfare has a potentially negative effect on personal decision-making, this kind of corporate welfare has a potentially negative effect on business decision-making. Don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of cutting taxes, but not as an incentive package coupled with more “stimulus spending” for Democratic interests. Scott Brown was riding a title wave of good will — if he couldn’t oppose the Jobs Second Stimulus Bill on principle at this point in his career, it’s hard to imagine we’ll be able to count on him in the future.

Populist candidates almost always turn out to be lousy leaders. From Hitler to Obama, I’m weary of the results when leaders get elected based on quips like “the People’s seat” and or their fondness for everyday people stuff like pickup trucks. I drive a Jeep Wrangler because I enjoy it and because it is the least lawyerly car I could imagine, but I’m not ready to imply it means I’d make a good Senator.

For those who believe that I’m being too harsh given the politics of the Northeast, I’ll just remind them that a United States Senator is elected to a six year term. This decision isn’t about re-election, this is about Brown showing his true colors.

Mashable is reporting that the FBI wants to require your internet service provider to monitor and log your web browsing activity for up to two years in the unlikely event that they should want to subpoena your browsing history.

We understand the tension between law enforcement and privacy advocates — after all, while we can imagine the potential for abuse, we can also see how evidence of a child pornographer’s internet activity could be useful in obtaining a prosecution that will help to stamp out some of the most disgusting and terrible crimes committed in our society. What we don’t understand is the technical backdrop for the request. Do ISPs currently log this information? If they don’t, wouldn’t this be an extremely burdensome request to place on service providers who are already starting to feel the squeeze as expensive upgrades loom and content providers push out more streaming video and high bandwidth applications?

I only mention this because when Shelly Roach reported leaks or rumors about the Obama administration shopping a new treaty requiring ISPs to keep extensive records of internet use by individuals, I thought the idea must be dead on arrival just because of the increased costs, but now, with Mashable’s article, I’m beginning to wonder whether the hardware is already in place and possibly already being used by many private ISPs.

We began covering “conservative activism” for Daily Uprising when the phrase seemed oxymoronic. At the time, we might as well have been talking about “principled politicians” or a “balanced budget” because combining the words “conservative” and “activism” seemed like just another pairing that sounds good in theory, but almost never happens in reality.

Today, however, “conservative activists” are very much real, numerous, and an undeniable force. While we were covering the 9/12 “March on Washington,” we asked one tea party activist from Missouri, who we found decked out in costume and smiles, whether she believed that conservative activism would be a “flash in the pan or a lasting movement.” Her answer was revealing: “This is just too much fun to fade away.”

Indeed, these are “fun” times.  We no longer think we need to ask whether conservative activism works.  Instead, our current interest lies in how we can keep it fun.

So, without further ado, here is the first of our top five suggestions on how to keep conservative activism fun:

1.  Don’t demoralize your troops by focusing on efforts to educate the masses.

Don’t loose perspective of the real impact your work will have by trying to educate the masses. Mass education through activism can be a strangely appealing myth for idealogues, but it is a goal that often brings frustration and misery to your fellow activists. Focusing on building and strengthening your community and targeting the egoistic weaknesses of politicians makes much more sense and is much more fun for your fellow activists.

I have a distinct memory of watching far left wing zealots march with mildly offensive and contentious signs in front of the Federal Building in Westwood, California. I was a young conservative student at neighboring UCLA at the time and, while I don’t remember the specific issue that rankled the moonbats, I do remember the reaction of other students: by and large, they distanced themselves from the crazies with signs. The activists probably thought that they were bringing “public awareness” and persuading people that there was some wrongdoing or injustice going on. The reality was that even generally liberal students didn’t want to be associated with a message that crazies were promoting. All these activists did was suck exhaust, put up with rudeness from passersby, and provide their cause with a fringe gloss.

We’d prefer to see our conservative activists return from successful events energized and recommitted to future involvement in the political process instead of stinging from arguments with strangers. They should be motivated to talk to friends about their happy experience and try to bring others who might share somewhat similar sensibilities into the fold. Real persuasion has always been much more likely to happen on an interpersonal level, anyway.

…

Tomorrow, we’ll discuss Rule #2:  Avoid internal power struggles.

A number of conservative bloggers are routinely insisting these days that “Obama hasn’t done anything, yet.” That was the theme of an SNL skit and a reasonable response to news that President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last week.

But we’d like to make a clarification: Obama has done much, but succeeded at little. When we watch the SNL clip and read certain bloggers who have taken to calling Obama a “do nothing” President, we get that confused feeling we get when someone entirely misses the point. The problem with Obama is that he and his Democratic Congress have been racing toward national fiscal disaster and a radical change in the way the United States governs itself. Obama’s not a slacker or someone too eager to show retraint before taking action.

We also want to point out that the mainstream media and conservative alternatives are focused largely on Congress and Obama’s influence over the legislature. However, Obama has quietly, but forcefully been remaking the executive branch. That is his right as President, but we should not ignore that it is going on or pretend that it is not significant.

Okay, ’nuff said.