Previous

Contents

Next

The Republicans Still Don't Get It
by Sean Gangol
[email protected]

Special to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise

About three years ago I wrote an article titled "Can the Republicans be Saved?" where I discussed what the Republicans could do to recover from their losses. I suggested that they could tone down on their social conservative rhetoric regarding issues like gay marriage, abortion and the war on drugs. I also wrote that they needed to abandon the neoconservative platform where they start unnecessary wars and suspend civil liberties in the name of fighting terror. These were the things that cost the Republicans their seats in 2006 and 2008. Unfortunately the Republicans still don't get it.

I once had hope that the Republicans had finally learned their lesson when the Tea Party came along and helped them take back congress. Sadly the Tea Party dropped off the face of the earth, after helping the Republicans gain more ground, similar to the way that the anti-war movement disappeared when Obama was elected. Now the Republicans are back to their old big government ways. They have once again proven that they are just as fiscally irresponsible as the democrats that they routinely criticize.

The choice that we have for presidential candidates is a direct testament to the fact that the Republicans are out of touch with the people who put them back in office. For awhile, we had both Perry and Bachman, who wanted to alter the Constitution to push their socially conservative beliefs on marriage and in Bachman's case, ban pornography once and for all. I know it's a dead issue since neither of the two are in the race now, but I felt that they are worth mentioning since it shows how certain overly conservative dim wits are willing to cling on to archaic beliefs.

Now we are down to four choices. One of them is Mitt Romney who is basically the Republican's version of the New Coke. For those who can't remember, the New Coke was one of the greatest financial mistakes made by Coca-Cola when they tried to make their product taste like their competitors. That is exactly what the Republicans are trying to do with Romney. They figure that they have the best chance with Romney, so they go with a man that isn't much different from their main opponent. The guy not only supports government controlled healthcare, but has implemented it in his home state of MA. The fact that he was endorsed by the statist John McCain, the man I thought the Republicans were stupid for nominating in the last presidential race, pretty much says it all. Then we have Newt Grinrich, who basically embodies the snake oil selling persona that everybody sees in politicians. As for Rick Santorum, he already made it clear that he has an absolute disdain for libertarians and individualists when he said "they have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do. Government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulation low and that we shouldn't get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn't get involved in cultural issues, you know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world, and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can't go it alone..."

By now you are probably asking, what about Ron Paul? Well, not only is Ron Paul the only candidate that is worthy to grace the halls of the Whitehouse, but he is basically the only hope we have of finally pulling the nation in the right direction. So why did I wait until the end of the article to mention Ron Paul? It is because he has about a snowball's chance in hell in winning. After all, he is the only candidate who understands the real meaning of the Constitution. He is the only one who seems to have a real understanding of basic economics. Never mind that he was one of the few people that actually predicted the burst of the housing bubble. We can't have a guy like that in office. We have to keep electing people who are constitutionally ignorant and economically retarded into office. It's all about the old establishment.

I have heard many excuses for why people don't want him in office. Usually the excuses are weak and are based on total ignorance. I have heard people say that he is too extreme or radical. Really? So I guess believing in the Constitution and having a monetary system based on sound money is extreme. So what is their idea of reasonable? Letting the government do whatever it wants, until our rights are completely eroded and we end up with an economic collapse similar to Greece? The most common excuse I hear from the more conservative minded people is Paul's stance on foreign policy. They all act as if his belief in nonintervention is on the level of a belief in Bigfoot or a flat earth. I have heard people go as far to say that we will be taken over by radical Muslims if Paul is elected, a notion that is more on the level of The Flat Earth Society then any of Paul's stances. It just goes to show that the conservatives will not shake their lust for war. They believe that we will be much safer if we have our troops run around the world and get into unnecessary conflicts.

Since the Republicans refuse to change, I will not cast a single vote for any of their candidates in the next election or any other election thereafter. That is unless Ron Paul gets the nomination, which is highly unlikely. We have given the Republicans chance after chance. I am through choosing the lesser of two evils because in the end you are still choosing evil. I may have a change of heart later, but I doubt it. In the last election I did a write in for Ron Paul. I could do the same in this election, but that would be pointless. As I said in the past, the Republicans need to abandon the big government platforms of George W. Bush and John McCain and embrace the small government platforms of Barry Goldwater and Ron Paul. Apparently they don't want to take the chance. Until they do, I will never give them a single ounce of my support.

Was that worth reading?
Then why not:
Pay Sean Gangol