2013: The way forward for liberty

Where do we go from here? Having taken a heavy blow, it would be easy to despair. But we won’t.

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 7, 2012 — I was wrong. The American people did not make the right choice yesterday. In fact, it can be argued that the American voter didn’t really make a choice at all except to continue the status quo for four more years.

Although I understood that the choice was a stark one between liberty and tyranny, perhaps that wasn’t so obvious after all. Perhaps in all the obfuscation of television ads, the real issues never really came through. Maybe people really did get side tracked by bimbos, birth control, binders and Big Bird and forgot all about Benghazi and the budget. Just another episode of Seinfeld.

If so, too bad. All the real issues are still there: unsustainable deficits, incomprehensible debt and looming tax increases that will likely plunge the economy into depression and inflation, maybe even hyperinflation. If you cast your vote thinking about the superficial things, you will have plenty of time to ponder these serious issues that neither party’s presidential candidate addressed very well.

That’s not to say that the campaigns didn’t try. In their own fashion they certainly did. The Democrat machine just seemed to roll over the opposition on election night. Everyone knew, or should have known since 2000, that the election would boil down to Ohio and Florida.

And yet with the future of the republic at stake, the turnout was lower than in 2008. It was widely reported that Obama didn’t generate the enthusiasm of the pervious election but then neither did Romney. We won’t know why for some time yet.

Libertarians who chose not to vote for the lesser of two evils didn’t affect the outcome at all. Democrats are always looking for a 1992 Ross Perot candidate, but Gary Johnson wasn’t the one.

Down ticket the news is not all bad for liberty. The Tea Party gains of 2010 are largely intact although there were a few gains and a few losses. The Senate is effectively the same, but the Republican side got three new solid conservatives and the Democrat side several far left liberals. Compromise anyone?

Were voters reverting to divided government, wary of a decade of one-party rule? Were they saying, in effect, “Get back in there and get it right this time”? Could be. Spinmeister Robert Gibbs wasted no time in saying that there must be bipartisan agreement—which in his lexicon means Republicans must agree to whatever the administration asks for or they will be painted as “uncooperative.”

An interesting development is that many successful Democrats, such as Tim Kaine, posed as fiscal conservatives; perhaps more Republicans should have emphasized that as well.

Incumbents won the vast majority of their races, which again highlights the status quo nature of the election. This was not a ground-breaking election like 2010, although it needed to be.

All this wouldn’t matter very much if the Supreme Court hadn’t thrown the Obamacare decision back to the electorate. Yet the law was not much of a campaign issue, nor does it appear to have been uppermost in voters’ minds. Today’s Rasmussen poll shows 50 percent of people still want the law repealed, but more than 50 percent voted for Obama.

They may regret their votes when the 26 new taxes start to take effect, or when they lose their current plans or their doctors, or when their insurance premiums go up, or when treatments are disapproved and care is rationed. By then it may be too late.

This president will continue his war on energy and continue to punish job producers. He will attempt gun control. He will slash defense budgets and expand welfare spending. He didn’t promise any of that on the campaign trail, but then the Republicans didn’t bring it up much either.

And if he doesn’t get his way, he will just write an executive order.

Freed from the necessity of another election, he will rule by decree. It is unconstitutional, but so what? Who’s going to stop him?

We the People are going to have to do it again. It is quite annoying, but we’re going to have to provide more direction to those we’ve hired to run the government. If we expect to break the two party welfare-warfare monopoly on power, then we’re going to have to recall the Spirit of 1776, the spirit of the Tea Party Revolution.

Rule by the self-proclaimed political elite is Oligarchy; we were formed as a Republic. We patriots are now the Rebel Alliance fighting the evil Empire. Mitt Romney, great human being though he is, turned out not to be Obi Wan Kenobi.

In the end, it really doesn’t matter. This country was founded relying on Divine Providence, not the will of a powerful leader. It’s one of the things that make us unique. Another is that Americans do not back down in the face of tyranny. It strengthens our resolve.

This is not a time to give up. We can do nothing else but fight on. This may not be the liberty-loving America of the Founders, but we are still Americans: Fighting tyranny is in our DNA.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from Red Pill, Blue Pill
blog comments powered by Disqus
Al Maurer

Al Maurer is a political scientist and founder of The Voice of Liberty. He writes on topics of limited government and individual rights.

Contact Al Maurer


Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus