There were two things that tickled my fancy this week, and one of them was a comment from a guy on YouTube to one of our videos who claimed that this was the first time he had ever commented on a video.

And maybe he even said anything on social media.

And his comment, I wish I had it in front of me,

but the upshot of his comment was, and he was responding to you, Bill, is that the reason why

conservatives don't have a vision for governing is because we don't want more government. And there

were a couple of people who were like, hurrah, hazah, yes, way to go.

And I thought, I think I understand what you mean by that.

But I think it doesn't accurately convey what conservatives' vision for governance is.

Because there are no, except for anarchists, there aren't any conservatives who are saying

what we need is no government. What they're saying is that government should be constrained

within the box, so to speak, in the federal case of the U.S. Constitution, and not be allowed

to stray beyond the borders of that box. And so,

anyway, I just, I said, you know, saying get the government off your back, like Ronald

Reagan used to say, doesn't mean eliminating all governance. You know, and I think we probably

done a poor job of communicating that over the years and I used to say

during the Tea Party movement in fact I think I said this in speeches at Tea Party events I said

standing up in front of a bunch of cheering partisans and saying I'm for limited government and lower

taxes begs the question you know it's like how limited, how lower? And how do you set that,

how do you set that level? And so then I started like writing things of like what conservatives

believe, like what's a, what's a conservative vision for governance? And, you know, one of my

examples was

that a single mom in Seattle shouldn't have to subsidize a public transit project in Tallahassee,

...