Everyone thinks they know the face of the enemy. He is Barack Obama. He is Barney Frank. He is Nancy Pelosi. He is…George Bush. He is John McCain.
The “enemy” isn’t obvious by the letter after their name, but by their policies. They may make the case that they’re conservative or libertarian, but they may just as well be progressives in conservative clothing. Be they “R” or “D”, they are still the same thing.
Jeff has been critical of John Oxendine, to say the least. Why? Because Oxendine is, in actuality, a progressive. Now, he’s pretty good at hiding it, but a conservative wants smaller government and free enterprise. They tend to want government at lower levels rather than the higher ones. In the ideal conservative world, the federal government is practically invisible, while state takes on more and local even more. However, Oxendine is on the record as wanting the state to take over Hartsfield International for the state, rather than leaving it to the City of Atlanta.
One of the tenets of progressivism is centralized control. This is what the state taking control of Hartsfield would amount to, and what keeping the purchase of alcohol illegal on Sundays is. But Oxendine isn’t alone in being a progressive in conservative clothing, or even the worst offender.
Former Presidential candidate John McCain campaigned on his own plan for health care, one that involved federal involvement in health care. I don’t remember the rest of his platform, but this one in particular sticks in my mind. You see, health care is the current favorite of the progressive movement, and John McCain offered his own stance rather than taking the conservative or libertarian tact of pointing out that the free market takes care of the vast majority of Americans and that a significant portion of those who don’t have insurance could if they chose, but have opted not to.
Progressives can be identified by a couple of key policy positions. First is anything that increases government. While some might argue that control should rest with the state rather than the federal government, that’s just window dressing. When you’re head is on the chopping block, do you really care whether the headsmen is the State or the Federal government? The same is true of progressive ideology. It doesn’t matter if it’s the federal or state government, your money is going to be taken from you and spent to pay for programs that the government has no business being involved in.
Far to often, people argue that we Libertarians should back off and support one of the chosen candidates for whatever office is around. Frankly, that’s what got us here. A vote for a progressive, of any type, is just another step on the road to ruin. Each of those votes is a paving stone on the path to Hell, well intentioned but still ultimately supporting the evil that is socialism. Instead, as a Libertarian, I’ll support freedom loving candidates who share the bulk of my beliefs. And yes, if they are Republican or Democrat, then a Republican or Democrat will get my vote. Until then, I’ll stick with Libertarian candidates.
You, obviously, are free to vote for whoever you want. But don’t pretend that everyone with a “R” after their name is a friend of freedom, and the same is true of those with a “D”. You have to look at their policies and ask yourself if they really stand for what you do. If so, then carry on. If not, then don’t follow the crowd and vote your conscious.
Thx very really!