<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[The Conservative Case Against&nbsp;Romney]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
</p>
<p><em>The Economist</em> <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21559630" target="_self">nails it</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Our prejudice is firmly in favour of a leaner state, but the Republicans  need to recognise, as their intellectual forebears did from Adam Smith  to Abraham Lincoln, that government has an important role to play in a  capitalist economy, providing public goods and a safety net. Teddy  Roosevelt broke up over-mighty companies, rather than doling out tax  breaks to them. Why on earth are people who champion a small state  supporting an expensive war on drugs that has filled the prisons to  bursting point without reducing the supply of narcotics?</p>
<p>But the  Republicans’ main problem is taxes. Successful deficit-reduction plans  require at least some of the gap—perhaps around a quarter—to be closed  by <a href="http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/is-netanyahu-a-leftist.html" target="_self">new revenue</a>. If the Republicans got rid of loopholes, they could cut  all the main tax rates and still raise more money.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But they are stuck on Norquist.</p>
]]></html></oembed>