After two years of Obama’s neo-Keynesian policies and with the Democrat’s health care law being the spark that fanned the flames of backlash against them and their agenda, the nature of the 2010 mid-term campaigns is set and the meaning of the election has become crystal clear for me.
The theme of the upcoming election is: self-reliance vs. dependence.
Republican policies favor America retaining it’s sovereignty, remaining on the offensive against Islamic jihadists, while reasserting the pro-growth policies of the economic wing of the Republican Party which is contributing to their high poll numbers and is symbolic of American’s underlying belief in capitalism and that people should be able to make the important decisions about their own lives.
Fortunately, the G.O.P.’s economic-oriented, small L libertarian faction has retaken center stage in the party. Thanks to the efforts of Representatives Ron Paul of Texas, Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina and the efforts of Tea Party-linked candidates such as Peter Schiff and Rand Paul.
So fed up with the disastrous interventionism of the current and previous Administrations, many Americans built upon an idea started by activists in the Ron Paul Presidential campaign by starting Tea Parties in order to focus their efforts in the political arena at undoing Obama and President Bush’s stimulus programs while clamoring for lower taxes and less government spending. While simultaneously hoping to stop the crime associated with undocumented/illegal immigration and the drug war.
Libertarian Party founder John Hospers is absolutely correct in his assertion that the Democrat Party is a haven for anti-Semites, racists, radical environmentalists, plundering trial lawyers, government employee unions, and numerous other self-serving elites who despise the Constitution and loath private property.
The Presidency of Barack Obama serves as a prime example of the warnings Hospers sounded in his 2004 endorsement of President George W. Bush describing what John Kerry would have done had he snagged the Oval Office that year.
In terms of his foreign policy, it is a small wonder that Obama is popular in the Islamic world. It is not only due to his wanting to pull back U.S. troops while thumbing his nose at Israel but also for his appeasement. He has gone out of his way to court despotic Islamic regimes (like Iran and Saudi Arabia), financially assisted jihadist groups (like Hamas), kow-towed to his European-cum-Harvard gurus and the America-hating autocrats at the United Nations.
Like Europeans, Islamists are not only resentful of the United States because of our freedom, wealth and prosperity. They are also an external symbol of Obama’s internal premise: America is a morally repugnant nation, with much to apologize for.
It should be humble, and not self assertive in world affairs while simultaneously she should beg forgiveness from the mullahs and European elites for being what she is. For being America.
Yet the overall threat of Islamic jihadists (which is a Democrat fifth column) and the policies of the current administration make it clear that Barack Obama and his Congressional cronies have utilized the current economic crisis in an attempt to remake America into a fascist democracy.
Any lack of differences between the two major parties have been erased due to the Democrat’s opening the spigot of infusions of taxpayer cash including the expansion of entitlements (such as Obamacare) and attempting to enact de-facto amnesty for undocumented/illegal immigrants in order to gain political pull.
While Congressional Republican’s implementation of their program may stumble along if they gain the majority like they did in 1994 they can stop much of what Obama has enacted and wants to continue after November.
Obama and Congressional Democrats hoped to justify one party rule to the people using the smoke-and-mirrors trick of getting things done but instead revealed themselves as the partisan top-down, control freak elites they truly are.
The Justice Department’s lawsuits against Arizona for enacting SB 1070, the left and mainstream media’s lies about Arizona’s immigration law and the Administration’s sanction of the vicious investigation of Sheriff Joe Arpaio are geared to intimidate people other than Obama’s cohorts from taking on initiatives to stop violent crime along the U.S.-Mexico border (which they had no intention of doing). Including halting terrorists from attempting to sneak into the U.S. from Mexico.
Yet behind the Tea Parties looms the potential for a resurgence of the religious right. But behind Obama, in the same proportion, lurks the equally ugly menace of the America-hating, nihilist Angry Left.
There really is no lesser evil in this election and if there was I might vote Libertarian or only vote on ballot questions.
The fact that the left is not only morally but also philosophically bankrupt does not mean that they are not a serious cultural threat in terms of our physical safety from overt or clandestine terrorist attacks.
The left’s support of the Gaza Flotilla campaign demonstrated to the world that they not only hate freedom but are ultimately anti-Western civilization due to their alliance with Islamist groups that back terrorism against America and her allies.
Voting Republican is the most libertarian activity one can do this year and for those of you who are undecided the undeniable reality is that this election will determine not only which party will control Congress but if an American will be dependent on others for their ability to exist or self-reliant in their own right (i.e. exist for their own sake).
Voting Republican will put the brakes on the Marxist tidal wave emanating from the White House and also halt the continued influence and increased growth of government and far-left organizations that benefit from its expansion (like ACORN) that are simultaneously hostile to America and libertarian principles.
Today we are at an important electoral crossroads for the future of liberty and, to borrow from the wisdom of John Hospers, as libertarians our first priority is to promote individual freedom and free markets, which is not necessarily the same as promoting the Libertarian Party.
If we vote Libertarian this time, we may win a short term minor rhetorical battle but ultimately lose the longer-term ideological war.