A lot of people to the right of, oh, say Hilary Clinton are trying to scare everybody by fear mongering about what a commie Barack Obama is.
Moi, as always, I'd rather worry about life's important questions like, who wrote the book of love. Still, the need to soothe my nervous nellie countrymen and women weighs heavily on me. I shall do what I can, because I shall do what I must with all the humility I can muster.
An Investors Business Daily editorial is in a tizzy because we are about to see Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism if your man is elected. The last guy to institute socialist policies in this country called it "Compassionate Conservatism."
Anyway, IBD accuses Barry of using code words. Oh, that's never happened before. Under the rubric, "economic justice," we have a wish list,
• "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.
• "Free" college tuition.
• "Universal national service" (a la Havana).
• "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families").
• "Free" job training (even for criminals).
• "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income levels).
• "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.
• More subsidized public housing.
• A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."
• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa.
He also wants a $10 minimum wage. The shocking thing is that he didn't suggest free braces and whitening for senior citizens. If they are going to have drug induced smiles, they should at least be on straight, bright teeth.
Now, as the Democrat Party is merely a cargo cult, there is little different from what any other Dem would propose. He was talking to a black audience and was trying to get some racial cred at the time. If you think, as Mencken did of an election as an auction in advance of stolen goods, what does one expect?
So what is actually going to happen when the O man ascends to the throne? If past is prologue we know pretty well what will happen. We know because someone has figured it out.
Howard Katz, The Gold Bug has looked into the matter and it is clear how presidents act,
A study of politicians from JFK on shows that most of them fulfill the campaign promises of their enemies and violate their own promises. The left still does not want to admit that it was their beloved JFK who got us into Vietnam with a carefully planned dance of two steps forward (toward war), one step back (toward peace). LBJ followed (what he thought was) Barry Goldwater’s program for war in Vietnam. The Republicans promised no price and wage controls in 1968 and enacted them in 1971. Ditto, ditto “peace with honor” in 1972. Ronald Reagan promised that he would not negotiate with terrorists and that he would follow Milton Friedman’s prescription to limit growth in the money supply to 2%-6%. 1986 saw an 18% increase in the money supply. George Bush, Sr. said, “Read my lips; no new taxes.” Then he enacted new taxes.
Clinton said he was the “woman’s candidate,” and women voted for him in large numbers. It turned out he was the woman’s candidate, but not in the way that people thought. Instead he fulfilled the conservative program of cutting back welfare, reducing the size of the Federal Government and balancing the budget.
So, President Obama will turn out to be ......President McCain. Oh joy. Start your office pool now as to what countries Obama will bomb.
Mr. Katz makes the case for voting third party.
So to answer our original question, how to vote in 2008, voting for the major party candidate closest to one’s position is not a good option because, if elected, he will betray his promises. However, voting for the major party candidate farthest from one’s position does not work either. All politicians, from whatever party, study the results of each election carefully and estimate what each vote means. If you vote for a candidate you do not support, then your vote will be estimated by these people to stand for the exact opposite of what you believe.
Therefore, if your vote is to count for anything, you must vote for the minor party closest to your position. That is, you must vote for a man who stands up for his ideology, and in this case it is an advantage that he cannot win. These minor party candidates are men of principle, but even if one of them weren’t, he could not betray you because he is not going to get elected. The major party candidate who wins then “steals” the minority candidate’s position, and your vote for him is a winner. For example, in 1932 the 3 far-left candidates together gathered a million votes (2½%), and F.D.R. “stole” their position (as Norman Thomas later complained).
Right now there are two minor party candidates, Ralph Nader running on the program of returning society to the Middle Ages and Bob Barr running on the program of increasing the amount of liberty in our society. Both are polling about 6% in this early part of the race. Barr has never run for President before, and it will be interesting to see how he does. He has already far outpolled any previous Libertarian Party presidential candidate.
I'm not convinced. Mr. Katz rails against the Federal Reserve. His logic is convincing, but there are just too much in powerful special interests that support American central banking. Barr could get 25% of the vote and it would not change anything. The system has to completely crash for things to change and it is not certain at that point the gold standard nirvana would come.
Still, even though I agree with Loren Lomasky, that voting is like cheering, I shall duly cast my vote for Mr. Barr, despite my reservations about him.