Topic: Election 2008
McCain, Palin - A Bridge to Nowhere The media has hyped the selection of Palin as a bridge to the undecided voters. This is a bridge to nowhwere.by Bruce West
(libertarian)
Sunday, August 31, 2008
McCain and Palin A Bridge to Nowhere.
John McCain recently named his VP candidate Sarah Palin as his running mate in an attempt to build a bridge and attract more voters. This bridge was a massive project which is similar to the bridge that was to be built in Alaska. This bridge of beliefs sounds good to the media and at first glance, but the bridge is shaky to say the least.
Issues:
Abortion: The bridge was supposed to connect the anti-abortion pro-lifer's of the party to his ticket. Given that Palin is a strict believer in pro-life, the pro-life may have the candidate they wanted, but at the same time Palin may even be too strict for some of this voting block. Palin believes abortion is not an option for rape or incest conception which is in contrast to the beliefs of some pro-lifers.
Hillary Clinton supporters: The McCain Palin bridge was intended to attract the women voters of the democratic party who were disenfranchised when Hillary was defeated by Obama. The problem with this bridge is most Hillary supporters believe in Pro-choice which Palin is in direct disagreement with.
Libertarians: The media was quick to pick up on the Polar bear issue, and they claim this Palin is a libertarian because of this. During Palin's short term as governor, She has acted in complete opposition to the libertarian beliefs. She is noted for passing the largest operating budge in Alaska history, raising taxes on the oil industry and then when fuel and energy prices escalated, she began working on giving some of the oil tax profits back to the citizens to correct her mistake of excessively raising the taxes in the first place. She is adamant in her opposition to abortion, gay marriage and marijuana legalization. These are fundamental beliefs for the libertarians she is supposed to bring over to the party.
Working class: If a worker does not agree with Palin, it seems to be an easy answer for her to fire them, or have them fired. How can she represent the working class when she uses her power as a governor to have her ex brother-in-law fired? Here is a guy working to make a living and pay his child support and she is pressuring her employees to have him fired. Because the Public Safety Commissioner would not fire his employee based on pressure he received from Palin, she had him dismissed. This was not the first time she had used her political clout to remove people who disagreed with her.
Other issues with Palin include the "bridge to nowhere." The media picked this up and credited her with canceling the project. The truth of the matter is that she supported the $400 million project until the federal government pulled its share of the budget calling it pork. Up until the point, Palin was a supporter of this project with no issues of spending our federal tax dollars for this pork project.
Palin has supported Obama's energy plan included rebates from windfall oil profit taxes which will only increase the price of oil and hamper the ability of the gas and oil companies to provide us energy at a reasonable price. It is obvious why she supports these oil taxes; Alaska profits from the taxes on oil industry. The tax that Palin created not only increased Alaska's record budget, it also produced a surplus for which the citizens of Alaska are paying at the pump.
Sure, she shots a gun and hates polar bears, but she is not a libertarian.
The only choice on the ballot this year to represent the some or any of the libertarian ideas and principles for the American people is Bob Barr and Wayne Root. The media must not be allowed to present this woman as a libertarian when she is not. The LP party has enough identity issues without being compared to this centrist candidate who supports Obama's energy policy and McCain's rightwing agenda
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 12 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Bruce West only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Bruce West is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: David F. Nolan
Date: 2008-08-31 13:20:16
Good points, Bruce. Republican activist Eric Dondero took me to task for my recent posting on Palin, but I think you are correct. Palin is no libertaian. She appears to be in agreement with us on some issues, but overall she's a hawkish social conservative with (apparently) a petty, mean streak. No wonder McCain likes her!
The best way to save the Republican Party now is to destroy it. In the marketplace of ideas, social conservatism is a viral infection contaminating the GOP. It represents an evolutionary dead-end whose logical conclusion is fascism if not outright totalitarianism. Is it not obvious that the imposition of the evangelical ideology--any fundamentalist ideology for that matter--lies in direct opposition to a free people in a democratic land? Our Constitution, specifically the separation of church and state, no longer serves as a bulwark against the morality police, who seek to impose faith-based notions such as creationism upon those of us with rational minds. Social conservatives aim to constrain freedom of thought, freedom of choice, freedom to pursue happiness. These freedoms live at the heart of an entrepreneurial and economically strong America. No doubt, the diktat the social conservative movement wishes to impose upon ALL us Americans is antithetical to a free market system, and therefore exists as hypocrisy within the Republican platform. Privatize profits, socialize losses, and make religion the opiate of the masses. Indeed, this has been a dark eight years of Orwellian doubletalk. Enough! I’m a Reagan Republican and I’m voting for Libertarian Bob Barr.
Yes, what people do not understand is that it is the president, along with the secretary of state (interventionist Lieberman, in McCain's case), national security adviser (Randy Scheunemann, the lobbyist for Georgia etc. and a famous neocon) etc. that will determine policy and NOT the VP. Palin is merely a pawn and she will by no means play the same role as Cheney did with Bush in determining policy. In reality she will only reside over the senate and attends funerals and weddings overseas, and she will have to deal with McCain's temper! She voted against the REAL ID etc., but do not think a McCain administration would ever reject that, nor FISA etc. etc. You have to look at the platform of the party, NOT the VP.
Palin is a compelling story, a conservative with some selective libertarian leanings, but will only be used as a pawn and McCain has taken a big gamble: she could catapult him to an unexpected win, or lead to a big loss. There will be a huge interest in her, but she will also be scrunized and confronted with her support of Pat Buchanan in 1996 as well as her very positive remarks about Ron Paul in early February this year. (She had NO comment on McCain at that moment and McCain fared dismally in the AK) primary. She would have to make a definite remark about Ron Paul: if she distances herself from him, she will loose all the libertarian Republican voters or symphathies she may have currently and if she affirms her stance on him, it will be a contrast to McCain, who holds views very much the opposite with regard to most of Ron Paul's philosophy.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
