Libertarians Voting for the Republican Ticket?!?!?!?!?!? Something tells me Obama is in some serioous trouble now...
How long before he dump Biden and BEGS Hillary to be his VP?!?!?!?!? [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sep 7, 9:19 pm, "M.A. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sarah Palinby Walter Block > No one who has anything nice to say about Ron Paul can be all bad. Sarah > Palin has said nice things about Ron Paul (seehere,here,here,hereandhere). > Ergo, therefore, as a result, it cannot be denied, it logically follows, > Sarah Palin cannot be all bad. That is, she cannot be all badno matter what > elseshe is guilty of (within reason of course.) > So, what are the criticisms of her? > First and foremost, she is accused of not having enough experience. I admit > it! She does not have enough experience. Enough experience, that is, to > become emperor of the world. Yes, John McCain, Barack Obama and Joe Biden do > seek this post of planetary domination, now held by George Bush. That is, > these three show every evidence of wanting to continue the U.S. role as > hegemon of the entire globe. Now, it may well be that Palin will in future be > seduced into this sort of ambition. But, at least as ofright now, there is > little or no evidence of it (apart from some pro-war sentiment). Of the four > presidential and vice presidential candidates, her present experience shows > theleastdesire to rule the world. So, her "lack of experience" is a good > thing, not a bad one. > Does she have enough "experience" to be president of a country with a limited > government, and no aspiration to be world dictator? Of course she does. And, > again, she hasmoreexperience in this regard than either McCain, Obama or > Biden. She, alone of the four of them, has hadexecutiveexperience as the > Governor of the great state of Alaska, while the other three have been > whiling their way in a relatively unimportant institution, in this era of > presidential power. So, don’t talk to me about experience, as a critique of > this lady. > Second, it is said that with five children, she has too many other > obligations to take on the role of vice president. Give me a break. She can’t > vote in the senate when there is a tie? C’mon! This charge emanates from > left-wing feminists, of course. Suppose Hillary were to have had five > children the ages of Sarah’s. Would the legions of her supporters be making > this case with regard to Mrs. Clinton? To ask this is to answer it. In that > case, Hillary’s ascendency would only serve as evidence that "You can have it > all." The hypocrisy of these "feminists" stinks to the high heavens. They do > not support the idea ofwomenbreaking through the so-called glass ceiling. > Rather, they favorleft-wing socialist femalesbeing given positions of > authority and responsibility. This is something very different. It is a rare > occasion that these feminists have been caught with their contradictions so > much in the public eye. All those sick and tired of these harridans ought to > thank Sarah for this one boon alone. > Third, a criticism made by some libertarians is that her adherence to our > principles is only skin deep; she has raised some taxes, considered banning > some books from libraries, engaged in public-private ventures regarding oil > pipelines, she is altogether too friendly to US foreign aggression. Yes, yes, > she is no libertarian, certainly not of the purist variety. She is no Ron > Paul. But, a little context here, please. Compared to McCain, Obama and > Biden, she is a veritable Murray N. Rothbard. What about matching her up > against all the other 49 governors? Well, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana is not > all bad as far as these things go, and there might be another half dozen of > this breed, mainly in the poorly populated states west of the Mississippi, > but surely Sarah Palin fits comfortably into this category. According tothis > source, tax freedom day arrives earliest in Alaska, of all 50 states. Not too > shabby, at least in this context. She favors drilling in theANWR, and that > alone is worth the price of admission. > Another critique emanating from this quarter is that even if Sarah isn’t all > that bad in terms of libertarianism, at least compared to her peers, as soon > as she goes to Washington D.C. as Vice President, she will "grow in office" > and become more acceptable to socialists such as those who plague theNew York > Times,Newsweek, NBC and the other major media outlets. Well, yes, I suppose, > this could happen. But, again, let us not lose sight of context. This > hasalreadytaken place for the likes of McCain, Obama and Biden, who have been > located in the beltway for many, many years. And, yes, there are indeed > "libertarian" think tanks now located inside the beltway whose adherence to > this philosophy has, sadly, deteriorated in the last little while. But there > is nonecessitythat this disease will afflict Sarah. Indeed, there are groups, > organizations and people who serve as counterexamples, and illustrate the > concept of free will. Exhibit "A" is of course Ron Paul. He has been a > denizen of Washington D.C. for decades now, and shows no signs of yielding to > this affliction. George Ayittey is as strong a supporter of the free society > as he was when he first became a professor of economics at American > University many years ago. Tom DiLorenzo is located near the beltway in > Baltimore, and is second to none in his adherence of libertarianism. Then, > too, there are a whole host of libertarians on the faculty of nearby George > Mason University. The Mises Institute itself, bastion of liberty and world > headquarters of the Austro-libertarian movement, was for a time located in > the DC environs. They departed, but not at all out of fear of compromising > with the principles of freedom. > Now that we have dealt with the spurious criticisms, what are the benefits of > the Palin candidacy? > First and foremost, just sit back and relax for a moment, and consider this > scenario. The McCain (ugh!) – Palin (whoop-di-do) ticket is elected in > November. The duffer kicks the bucket after a heart attack in early 2009, and > our girl is now President of these here United States. Who does she choose as > Vice President? Why, a certain Congressman from Texas. I’m not at liberty to > reveal his name at the present time, but I’ll give you a hint: he is widely > known by both friends and enemies as "Dr. No." Double whoop-di-do, say I. No, > quadruple. Unlikely? Yes. But politicallyimpossible? No. > Did you notice how Sarah is widely referred to, when in formal mode? Yes, > asMrs.Palin, notMs.Palin. Isn’t that wonderful? Doesn’t that really stick it > to the socialist feminists? Yes, indeedy do. And, there is no group that more > deserves such a come-uppance than they. They have long striven to stuff this > horrid bit of nomenclature (seehere) down our collective throats, and, on all > too many occasions have succeeded. It is time, it is long past time, that we > jettison this insufferable politically correct attack on traditional gender > distinction. > She delivers a hugely deserved kick in the teeth to those limousine liberals > who infest both east and west coasts of our country. I’m talking about the > intellectual-academic-cultural "elites" who dismiss the rest of the populace > as inhabiting "fly over" country. Here is a rifle toting, moose killing, > basketball playing, beauty contest winning, charismatic and eloquent long > happily married conservative hockey mom who has made something of herself in > a very competitive field, who has not gone to finishing school at Harvard, > Yale or Princeton. She does not revere the mainstream media; far from it. She > is a breath of fresh air blowing in from our northernmost state. God bless > her. > Sarah has almost entirelypushedObama off television, and newspaper headlines. > The timing of McCain’s announcement of her candidacy as Vice President could > not have been better. It took focus off Obama’s windy, insufferable, > socialist but, yes, eloquent, acceptance speech like no other announcement > could have done. If that, alone, was Sarah’s only accomplishment, it would > have almost been worth it. > True confession time. Before Palin (BP), I was leaning toward Obama. I > thought he was marginally less likely to drop a nuclear bomb on some hapless > third world country than mad bomber McCain. I regarded, and still do, foreign > policy as more important than domestic, given that "war is the health of the > state." And, there was very little to choose between the Republocrats and the > Demopublicans on economics. Socialism from both quarters (although I admit > it, the prospect of Alan Dershowitz on the Supreme Court did give me pause > for thought). But now, after Palin (AP), I am shifting my allegiance to the > Republicans. Go, Sarah, go! But what about the libertarians? Don’t speak to > me about the libertarians! The Barr-Root ticket is arguably less libertarian > than Sarah Palin. Barr in particular has been a gigantic disappointment > (seehereandhere). ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
