Topic: Election 2008
Libertarians for Barack Why Libertarians (in swing states) should vote for Obama as the lesser evil.by Vaughn
(libertarian)
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Why Lovers of Liberty* Should Support Barack Obama
* In Swing States
I want to begin my first column for Nolanchart.com with a little personal history. In eight presidential elections since 1976, I've voted for one party Libertarian. In cases where a Libertarian wasn't available, I would usually vote for the Republican, considering that the lesser of the two evils. No longer. In the 2006 Congressional elections, I voted Democratic.
Why? In short, because George W. Bush and the Karl-Rove-dominated GOP has betrayed every ideal that Republicans and Libertarians have in common. They lied us into two unnecessary wars. They've busted the budget and bankrupted our country. They've gutted the Bill of Rights and spied on Americans, with the excuse of a hugely-exaggerated terrorist threat. And- this is probably most unforgivable - they've been complicit in the confiscations of guns in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
So it's my opinion that the GOP needs to be rebuked, strongly and decisively, even if it means voting for "the enemy." Now in my case, I may still vote Libertarian (despite my utter dislike of Bob Barr ) because I live in Arizona and I think it's quite unlikely that McCain will lose in his home state. The same goes in other states that are decisively for McCain or Obama . By all means, show your displeasure by voting third party, any third party.
But what about those states where the race is still up for grabs? In those states, I believe we should support the clear lesser evil: Barack Obama.
By now, all my Republican friends and colleagues are shouting "heresy!" (At the moment, I'm registered Republican myself- which I did so I could vote for Ron Paul in the primary, naturally.) But I think I can list ten good reasons why libertarians and even conservatives should hold their noses and vote for Barack.
1. Much of the stuff going around about Obama on the internet is total nonsense. "He's a Muslim, he supports terrorism, he hates the flag." As Colonel Potter would say, "Horse-hockey!" I'll admit there's plenty to dislike about Obama's politics without resorting to lies. The man isn't THAT bad.
2.Obama has a more sane, even-tempered personality than McCain. McCain was a hot-head to begin with, then he spent five years in a POW camp, which will mess anyone up psychologically. I don't want John McCain's finger anywhere near the nuclear button.
3.Likewise, despite my strong dislike of Joe Biden, at least he's not Sarah Palin. The woman is unqualified to be dogcatcher, much less Vice President. She has indicated a willingness to go to war with Russia in support for Saakashvili's Georgia, a despotic regime in a small country with absolutely no strategic importance to the US.
4.The right-wingers say that despite Obama's flip-flops on the "war on terror" and US support for Israel, that he still holds to his radical anti-military views, and will immediately pull out of Iraq and end our "special relationship" with Israel. We can only hope! Look, we've got a presence in over a hundred countries, and we spend almost as much on our military as all other countries combined. Isn't that a little overkill?
5.Speaking of the Welfare Queen of the Mideast, if you've ever checked out the Israeli press online, the candidate who received the most vitriol was Ron Paul. The second most hated man was Barack Obama. Anyone who's that despised by the Israeli right wing can't be all bad. Look, I've got nothing against Israel, I'm just tired of supporting its government, which is influenced out of all proportion by the fanatical loud-mouthed Arab-hating settler community.
6.I'll admit it- either Obama or McCain could conceivably try to become dictator, but Obama is less likely to succeed. That's because the Right already hates him, and they're the ones with the guns. Anything McCain does, they're likely to accept like bleating sheep, because he's a "war hero" who will invoke patriotic rhetoric to justify his actions. His biggest foes would likely be in the Peace Movement. As much as I respect them, most of them are liberals who are far too wimpy to stage a revolution, should one (God forbid) become necessary.
7.With the public uproar over the bailout of Wall Street, it's likely we'll have a backlash against the Democrats in the House, the majority of whom supported that fiasco. So Congress could easily go to the Republicans. And a divided government is good for freedom =checks and balances and all that.
8.The American free enterprise system may not survive another corrupt big-government conservative administration. George W Bush has done more damage to capitalism than any president since FDR. His Social Security privatization plan was so flawed that it may be a generation or more before we have another crack at it. And the mortgage meltdown ? Forget the propaganda about the Community Reinvestment Act. The major cause was the Fed's super-easy money policy, enacted with Bush's support, to try to fix the economic damage caused by the Tech Bubble and the 9/11 attacks (which were in turn enabled by the criminal negligence of You Know Who.)
9.Obama is just plain smarter than McCain. Obama graduated from Harvard Law School in the top ten percent of his class. McCain graduated from Annapolis near the bottom of his class. Voting for McCain is like telling your kids, "Don't study, do nothing but party in college, and you too can become President."
10.Our first Black President, how cool would that be? I'd rather it be Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell or even Colin Powell- but still, it would say to the world that we're finally putting this racism stuff behind us.
-VT
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 10 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Vaughn only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Vaughn 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.
I guess "Libertarians for Obama" is kind of like saying "Libertarians for Hitler." Trying to turn the libertarian movement into Pro-Totalitarianism, 'eh? Ain't gonna work. We'll fight these Fascists like Obama til the bitter end.
You say you're a Libertaian Party person. Than you should be aware that Sarah Palin attended two LP meetings in Anchorage in 2005/06, and was backed by Party leaders in her 2006 bid for Governor.
Current LPA Chair Jason Dowell heartily congratulated her on being picked VP in September.
She is the first libertarian every to appear on a major party ticket, yet dumbass so-called Libertarians like you are completely unaware of her extensive libertarian background.
You say the "GOP should be rebuked." Does that include Tom McClintock and the numerous other libertarians running for Congress this year on the Republican ticket nationwide? How about all the libertarians, INCLUDING LIBERTARIAN PARTY MEMBERS!!!, who are running on the Republican line for State Legislatures.
If McCain tanks, all those libertarians will go down with him. And traitors like you are cheering on losses for the libertarian movement.
This quote represents my feelings exactly, too bad Nader did not get to say this on TV; it would have gotten a lot of attention:Obama doesn't represent real change, Nader said. "This guy is the biggest con artist in our generation by far."
Obama is Hitler? That's the kind of wild exaggeration I'm talking about. Like I said, lesser evil. No, I don't trust Obama on a lot of issues, especially gun control. But McCain has himself sponsored anti-gun legislation, I believe with Joe Lieberman (a notorious anti-gunner) as co-sponsor.
I was not aware that Sarah Palin had any association with the LP. I have not been personally involved with the LP for several years now, and I've become a bit disenchanted with the organization- but that's another story. I'd heard about Palin's contacts with the Alaska Independence Party, and that was actually a plus in my book. But I stilll don't think she's qualified to hold national office, especially considering her utter lack of knowledge of foreign policy. Also, there are people who call themselves libertarians who are, IMHO, not libertarians at all, such as Neal Boortz, who once advocated arresting peace marchers. (You're free to have the same opinion of me, if you wish. :-) )
Finally, I've mentioned my support for Ron Paul, who was still, last time a checked, a Republican. I know there are a few good Republicans - and yes, even good Democrats - especially on the local level. If it were Ron Paul or Chuck Hegel running for President in McCain's place, I'd gladly vote for him. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear, I'm talking about the national GOP leadership. And hey, you don't have to get personal about it, OK Eric?
Great piece of humor, Vaughn. I laughed my butt off! As if any libertarian would vote for either of those lying, oath-breaking, word-twisting, "pretentious ashes" (as Rand would say).
I especially enjoyed the way you employed so many logical fallacies (appeals to authority, ad hominen attacks, begging the question, and so much more). It made your parody even more of a riot, seeing how the reasoning was so blatantly laughable.
I hope you pen an encore! Swap "McCain" for "Obama" and change the particulars. I can\\\'t wait!
I'd call it a "reverse appeal to authority" - if the Likud party is for it, I'm against it. :-)
But it's not relevant to call my attacks "ad hominem," because in the case of a political candidate, it's the _person_ you're supporting or opposing. In this case, that person's history, character, temperament and intelligence _are_ important. And since there's so little actual difference between Obama's and McCain's proposals (whose administrations, I expect, would be extensions of Clinton and Bush, respectively), those small differences are all you're got to go on.
That and the notion of "balance of power." If you don't - as I do - expect the Dems to lose the House because of the bailout, then that helps bring McCain toward the "less evil" side.
Hey, I'm not the first libertarian to espouse the "lesser evil" argument. I just have the feeling that a lot of libertarians will - because of the high emotions in this race, as well as Barr's obnoxious behavior - buy the argument that McCain is that lesser evil. But that story has two sides, and I've always enjoyed playing the devil's advocate.
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.
