If Republicans Were Smarter, They'd Be Republicans
Barack Obama's Victory Speech tells you all you need to know about why the Republicans lost. by John Armstrong
(libertarian)
Friday, November 7, 2008
Barack Obama's victory speech on Tuesday night is very interesting. At times it sounds more like he's promoting Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty than accepting victory as a Democratic President.
The Republicans did not lose the election because of Sarah Palin. Nor was it because of an overwhelming turnout. Nor was it due to the desire of so many Americans to see "Change." The Republicans lost because they forgot what it meant to be a Republican.
Ronald Reagan said, "The heart and soul of conservatism is libertariansism."
Barack Obama said, "The true strength of our nation comes...from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."
Liberty? Opportunity? These are not Democratic ideals. They were Republican ideals, until the Republicans decided to rip the "heart and soul" out of their party to promote a neocon agenda of "security and safety." Without their heart and soul, they got their asses handed to them by the asses, er, donkeys.
To rub more salt into the wounds of the Republicans, Obama also said this about the Republican Party:
Let's remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House, a party founded on the values of self-reliance and individual liberty and national unity. Those are values we all share.
Self-reliance? Yeah, like using tax money to "help people pay their mortgages" as McCain proposed? Individual liberty? Sure, unless you don't think you should have your 4th Amendment rights violated to use a ticket you purchased from an airline. National unity? There has rarely been a time in our nation's history when we've been more divided than leading into the election.
Why? Because the Bush Doctrine of "you're with us or against us" didn't just apply to foreign nations. It applied to anyone who wished to use their first amendment rights to criticize government policies. If you didn't agree with the government, you weren't a "patriot." A "patriot" is one who stands for the ideals the Republicans were founded on and seemed to have forgotten--not someone who turns a blind eye when the government begins to overstep its bounds in order to keep us "safe."
If the Republicans want to understand why they lost this election, it isn't hard to figure out. They forgot who they were. Or as Ron Paul said in a debate in which he was laughed at and booed, "The Republican Party has lost its way." They forgot to promote the values, that as Obama said, "we all share."
If they want to get back into power, they have to be smart enough to be Republicans again. The beauty of this is that this time, many of the people they will turn to to run for office while espousing these ideals will actually believe in them after they are elected. It won't be about winning an election, it will be about Restoring our Republic.
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The Campaign for Liberty couldn't be better poised to become the major force in the Republican Party than it is right now. Just as Reagan ran on these ideals after a massive liberal was in office, there will be a new Reagan who emerges. And the country will be ready for it. This time around, the Republicans were just too stupid to listen to a man that was screaming it all along. Instead, they had to hear the words from the Democratic President-elect.
Your Fellow American,
John Armstrong
www.campaignforliberty.com
strongarmedjohn@yahoo.com
As always, unlike the NFL, the author grants full permission to rebroadcast, retransmit, give accounts of, repost part or all of this to your blog or anywhere else in order to promote the Restoration of Our Republic.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 41
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of John Armstrong only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
John Armstrong 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 think you're waaaay off in your assessment of what happened. Republicans lined up behind McCain ~ all the way from Limbaugh to Hannity to Mitt Romney to Rudy Guiliani. The problem wasn't with the Republicans, it was with the Independents and Democrats. He didn't sway any votes AT ALL. Neither party can win without swaying the independents (or, if you'd prefer to call them the I'll-vote-for-the-popular-one crowd). And the HUGE influx of new voters ~ blacks, latinos, under 25 ~ were not swayed by McCain's attacks and old reverie. We all knew he was just another 4 years of Bush without the Texas swagger.
The real reasons McCain lost are simple:
1) People were wise to the Sarah Palin is competent ploy. She had been the Mayor of a town of less than 9,000 people, had only been Governor for less than 2 years, had never traveled out of the country, had never passed any national legislation, and couldn't even name the world leaders of most countries.
2) Trying to slander and smear people by association doesn't work. We know Obama didn't believe the ideas of Rev. Wright, or the other "terrorists" the rabid Republican right tried to imply were "pals" of his. You have to run on YOUR OWN VIEWS not try to RUN DOWN the other candidate.
3) You have to get someone who is HEALTHY to run for President. Are you telling me that McCain is really the BEST the Republicans have got? He's a doddering old man of 72 who spent 6 years in a POW camp, had several recurring bouts with cancer, could barely raise his arms because his shoulders had been broken while tortured. They've got to get someone who will LIVE through his term!
4) They can't keep fighting the NEWS MEDIA. No one believes everything they tell us anyway. Most people are getting news over the INTERNET now. Even newspapers are failing. The candidate's unedited message will be heard in debates, speeches, advertisements and through surrogates. Complaining about the NEWS MEDIA is like complaining about the REFEREES in a sporting event. Nobody likes crybabies!
5) You can't run UNPOPULAR candidates for office even if you LOVE their ideas. Ron Paul hasn't got enough following to start a parade! Why don't they get someone like Limbaugh or Hannity? They think they know what the world needs. They think they're popular ~ and they are, until they have to compromise, tone down their rhetoric, or try to be civil! They spit more venom than a Cobra!
Hope these suggestions help. Because, for us Obama supporters, we're just happy little SOCIALISTS, ready to take as many rights away from people as we can ~ and TAX, TAX, TAX until you bleed! Ha! Ha!
Master C, first of all Palin was the only reason McCain won any states at all. Before Palin, Bob Barr was at 6-7%, aftewards he was not even at 1%. Palin is the real deal and the liberals are scared of her.
Palin had more experience than Obama, so that bird doesn't fly. As a mattter of fact, Obama has never held a job.
True the Mainstream media is failing, but still a majority of people are too lazy to do any real research on the net, otherwise they would have figured out Obama's scam for the house he purchased and the fact that his mentor was a leader in the communist party of America.
Actually Ron Paul is very popular, and if the media did not black him out he would have taken it. Remember all the media attention Rudy Giuliani got from the media, and he never did better than 5th place! If Ron Paul had been given the same attention, we would have Ron Paul as President right now. In addition, the media did something very tricky, they basically promoted all the conservative candidates just enough so that none of them could move ahead - that left McCain, who is from the liberal end of the party. As a matter of fact Democrat John Kerry wanted McCain to be his VP when he ran.
Last but not least, you have about a year and then campaigning for the House starts all over again, and I predict a Republican takeover again and Obama will be out of luck. The problem that Obama has right now is that we have overspent and the USA is broke, so I am not sure what Obama is going to be able to do - he really can't spend anymore, it will just get worse and he will get crushed in 2012.
You're about as BACKWARDS as an umbrella turned inside out! What a daydreamer. But, if you like going through life in that HAZE of CONFUSION, go ahead. My guy's in the WHITE HOUSE. Where's yours?
That Palin thing about her being EXPERIENCED is about as lame as claiming that my AUNT GERTIE can cook because she puts food on the table. If you want Palin to become President, let her go through a few general debates and interviews. When she gets away from a teleprompter and her joke writers, she's as bland, vacant, and clueless as Lindsay Lohan!
Ron Paul had his chances at mainstream exposure, and plummeted down the list of possible candidates as fast as stocks have been falling in the market the last month. The guy's an off-beat, off-base LOSER who takes extreme positions to pick up the riff raft who won't go along with conventional wisdom.
You can stay out in the WEEDS with your suppositions that the country will come around to your way of thinking ~ but about the only support you'll get is from the COWS. MOOOOOOOOO!
It looks to me as thought the Republicans did win.
They gave the election to Obama and will now have a scapegoat to blame in 2012 after four more years bigger government, higher taxes, less freedom and lower living standards allowing them to come back in and bring us four more years of bigger government,higher taxes, less freedom and lower living standards etc. etc. etc.
"Democracy, Liberty, Opportunity and Unyielding Hope". Thanks so much for clarifying the ownership{Republican} of these ideals. I always mistakenly believed these were actually "American" ideals. Maybe if the Republicans promise to give back these ideals to the American people, as Obama did[and we should give him at least a couple of weeks of office to see if he actually meant it], they might get elected to an office. Until then, you should rest easy knowing your party has them locked away out of the view of the general public!
Posted By: Liberty Light
Date: 2008-11-09 00:15:18
Reality Check: The world is owned by special interests. Sovereignty, both national and individual, is under attack worldwide. The unconstitutional 700 billion dollar bailout bill was passed as a precursor to a new world financial system. Barack Obama will officially usher in the New World Order. Fundamentally, there was no difference between Obama and McCain as both were vying for the opportunity to feed on you and your family's future.
We must not depend on any president to lead us. The greatest amount of freedom, peace, and prosperity can be achieved by reducing the Federal government to it's constitutional level, adopting a non-interventionist foreign policy, returning to sound monetary policy, abolishing the Federal Reserve and IRS, and repealing the 16th amendment. Now that is change in which we can believe!
NOBODY had experience to be POTUS because NOBODY was POTUS before. Therefore, the POTUS is always a job for the unexperienced. Senate experience of voting 'yay' or 'nay' on bills has nothing to do with executive experience. The closest somewhat relevant experience for POTUS is Governor, Mayor or a private organization CEO as it deals with the executive powers. Ironically even though probably insignificant and very little, the only person that had somewhat a relevant experience for POTUS was Palin. Neither Joe Biden, Obama or McCain have had relevant executive experience.
On the other hand, one has to applaud Obama on one of the most well managed political campaigns. Maybe then the 'executive' experience on managing his campaign will help him.
With the exeption of Ford who was not elected and Obama now elected, since the 70's all elected POTUS had some relevant executive experience: Carter-Governor of Georgia; Reagan-governor of CA; Bush Sr.-Director CIA; Clinton-Governor Arkansas; Bush jr- Governor of TX.
Posted By: Liberty Light
Date: 2008-11-09 11:28:06
Reality Check: The world is owned by special interests. Sovereignty, both national and individual, is under attack worldwide. The unconstitutional 700 billion dollar bailout bill was passed as a precursor to a new world financial system. Barack Obama will officially usher in the New World Order. Fundamentally, there was no difference between Obama and McCain as both were vying for the opportunity to feed on you and your family's future.
We must not depend on any president to lead us. The greatest amount of freedom, peace, and prosperity can be achieved by reducing the Federal government to it's constitutional level, adopting a non-interventionist foreign policy, returning to sound monetary policy, abolishing the Federal Reserve and IRS, and repealing the 16th amendment. Now that is change in which we can believe!
Why don't you crawl out from under that bush you're hiding under and step into the REAL WORLD. This mindless semantical blathering that you and the rabid Republican attack machine engage in is as lame and wrong as Fox News claiming they're "fair and balanced".
Executive experience is leadership experience, experience making decisions. And, to think that ANYONE who has ever run for a national office DOESN'T have executive experience is like saying that anyone who hasn't been in a courtroom isn't an attorney. There are many, many different roles for an attorney outside of the courtroom, and many, many different ways to gain "executive experience".
Besides, as I have said before ~ is having executive experience and BAD JUDGMENT better than having no executive experience and GOOD judgment? I guess the electorate made that decision EMPHATICALLY!
You are full of fallacies. You just ragged on Fox News when you said in an earlier post that complaining about the media is just like complaining about a referee at a sporting event.
Grow up and stop being such a sissy.
We all know McCain was not the best choice. We all know Obama was not the best choice. Ron Paul was right when he said that Americans were stuck with the choice of voting between the lesser of two evils. Both Republicans and Democrats were running on socialistic values. Do you really want to destroy democracy in the name of socialism? We may as well rename ourselves the United Socialist States of America. It'll be the "change" you wanted right?
Take your socialism and get it the hell off of my lawn.
You have no idea whether your hero Obama has Good Judgement or not. The only thing Obama has been really good at is managing an excellent campaign and be an excellent marketer of his own image. Thats it. ..and to be elected to the office of POTUS those are the only things you need: Good image + good marketing because whoever moves the most people gets the job regardless of his executive experience. Also, the mess created by the current administration helped him significantly so he ran his campaign at the right time and beat Hilary who had the MSM behind her for almost a decade.
Only time will tell if your idol hero Obama has good judgement or not. He has made a lot of promisses that he won't be able to keep. But remember, it does not matter who the President is or even what kind of government you live on, the only person responsible for yourself is YOU. You will be responsible for your own successes and failures and for your own life.
You are dellusional if you think Obama will fix everything. Neither Obama nor any other President can fix the Nation. Only YOU, and ME, and EVERYBODY else out there through our own individual efforts, desicions and initiatives can bring America forward regardless of who the President is. The Government usually restricts growth. Haven't we forgot those famous JFK words: "Ask what not the country can do for you but what you can do for your Country"
And I am not hiding under any bush, I live about three hours away from you 'Master' Carl. Maybe I will stop at Kalamazoo on my way to Chicago and meet with you one day.
You're really out there in LEFT FIELD, thinking that we're all ON OUR OWN. You couldn't make it ON YOUR OWN, and neither could I. We NEED others to provide their strengths, and help us to have things that we couldn't otherwise.
Building your own home, paving the roads, healing wounds and treating sickness. Police, fire, postal service, blah, blah, blah.
No man is an island. The sooner you learn that, the sooner you'll get off this "I STAND ON MY OWN TWO FEET" stuff, and realize that we are INTERdependent.
By the way, I moved from Kalamazoo to Grand Rapids about a year ago. So, if you want to meet me in Kalamazoo, I won't be there. But, I'll be thinking about that LOST SOUL, driving around in oblivion looking for me. Kind of like a lot of your ideas.
We are only interdependent due to the giant government spending that we have gotten outselves into. Stop fueling the fire and just take a peek at the Constitution. You will see that we are far off of what is right. Until then just go outside for a jog, maybe swim a couple laps or two to relieve your stress and then remember who you just elected president. You of all people should be more than thrilled to see this spawn of socialism enter the oval office. The far left has finally gotten what they want. A zippo to the Constitution.
Get off the Obama coolaid, it is flawing your judgement. Anyone can spew all those Democratic talking points they taught you. Obama only won because Bush was one of the worst Presidents ever and his win was a judgement on Bush and nothing else.
Ron Paul was the only candidate who offered real change and your insults are quite funny. Ron Paul has started a grassroots revolution that will produce a candidate someday that you will fear and you will look back and wonder why you made fun of the only guy who has any common sense in Washington and tells it how it is.
Posted By: Adam Ross Cooke
Date: 2008-11-10 15:13:08
C, yes, we are interdependent. The difference between your view of interdependency and rational people's is that you think that just because you depend on something, you have the right to it. A rational person looks to see what they can TRADE for it.
Sean, unless you name really is Galt, don't use that name to post Libertarian links. Ayn Rand was opposed to the LP for a damn good reason.
