Lunchpail Republicans . . .

[classicman]

I guess we just see this differently.
I think he makes some very interesting points that apply to both sides.
Perhaps I erred by posting it in this thread.
His "What if's" are pretty appealing to some who are not blinded by party affiliation.

He was basically arguing the opposite, I think, of the lunchpail republican ideal - a "smaller",
economically conservative government that DOESN'T fight on behalf of or even defend working-class employment.

I disagree. Where do you get that from?

I also think that sometimes hosts, especially on Fox, sometimes (being kind) toe the line
or are basically told what to say. [cough]Koch Brothers[cough]
I get the impression that this is certainly not ^^that.^^
Of course, that's just my opinion. Take it for what you will.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by classicman

I disagree. Where do you get that from?

Wait, sorry, maybe I do fundamentally misunderstand his point. How is his position supportive of manufacturing and other blue-collar job creation? I understood his libertarian position as being hostile to the idea of (actively investing public intent in) maintaining or growing the american manufacturing sector (that is to say, as being economically conservative enough to argue that public support of the american manufacturing sector is a problematic "big-government", "socialist" intention)? His position was somewhere to the libertarian-conservative (going on the political compass, two-axis, economic-vs-social dimension, definitions) side of the Republican party, where I would argue that the lunchpail republican position is on the socialist-authoritarian end of same spectrum. How was, in that quote/video, Napolitano arguing for the (what I understand the lunchpail republican to be) position that American manufacturing, blue-collar jobs should be encouraged rather than discouraged?