After-Election Thoughts

Last night marked the end of another election cycle, and with its conclusion I have various thoughts and emotions that run though my head as I’m sure many do.  What follows are some of those random thoughts concerning various aspects of the elections.

The Presidency – Either way the coin fell I knew that I would not be happy with the outcome.  Being that I voted for neither one of the main party candidates, I can’t say that I would have felt any better should John McCain have won.  Let’s face it, our choices were between a real democrat, and a republican pretending to be a democrat.  That being said, it will be interesting to see just where Barack Obama will take this country as president.  Also, on a positive note… can anyone say, “Ron Paul 2012″?

Congress - I’m very happy to see that the democrats were unable to gain a super majority.  If that had happened, I feel that we would have been in for even tougher times than we are about to face as a nation.  Government has ballooned over the last 8 years and I still worry that it will continue to grow at an alarming rate.  One of the things that amazes me though is that with the dismally low approval rating of Congress, people still increased the size of the controlling party.  Doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense.  It will also be interesting to see if the Congress does an adequate job of investigating the whole bailout issue like they promised to do after the election.  Being that the trail will lead back to many democrats, and many have a short memory of promises made, if it is done at all, I’m sure it will be a sham on the public.

Third Party Candidates – The third party candidates showed very low numbers as was to be expected, but there was one interesting thing to note… Bob Barr took 1% of the vote nation wide which I feel is a direct reflection of some of his words and actions related to Congressman Ron Paul’s unwillingness to “play ball” the way Barr wanted.  Obviously the 6% polling Barr continued to cling to throughout the race was a figure that likely had diminished long before the ballots were counted.  Be that as it may, we must continue to work to make sure that third party candidates have a voice in elections, and that people truly have a choice in elections rather than just having the option of the current two-party-as-one system.

With the next election cycle two years away, I continue to wrestle with my own options of running for office.  Should I run, or shouldn’t I?  That is the question, and it’s one that I’ll have to continue to discuss with my wife and children.  As for now I’ll have to leave everyone hanging as to whether this will become official for 2010…

An Evening With Mark Schauer

Mark Schauer is the Congressional Democratic Candidate for the 7th District here in Michigan, and I had the opportunity to sit down with him last night with some other voters at the Jackson Coffee Co. for a round table discussion.

Before I go any further, I think I should say that I respect the current Michigan State Senator for putting himself in a position to answer the questions of real voters in an open forum. This is something that is seriously lacking in today’s political arena where most people are rendered mute spectators instead of active participants. That being said, there is very little that myself and Mr. Schauer agree on.

There were a total of seven voters who showed up for the discussion, two of which (myself included) were Libertarian minded individuals. There were also two retired school teachers in attendance, a manager for a local restaurant, a retired automotive engineer, and another gentleman who retired from an industry he did not mention.

Discussion at times was quite lively, particularly dealing with the constitutional role of government. When asked point blank by Craig Radala whether or not taking money from one group of people through taxation, and giving that money to another group was socialism, Mr. Schauer after a lengthy pause responded, “no.” There was also much discussion on government intervention within the marketplace. Mr. Schauer left the meeting visibly flustered, however all but one of the other voters in attendance seemed to have enjoyed the experience, with one participant commenting during the discourse, “I’m having fun just sitting back and watching”.

I closed out the meeting with State Senator Schauer with a handshake and this quote by George Washington, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Mr. Schauer responded with a distasteful tone saying, “It sounds to me like you’re anti-government.” I replied that was not the case, but that I was in fact pro small government. Overall it was a good experience for everyone all around, even for Mr. Schauer who I hope will not let his apparent frustrations keep him from holding future events like this one.

Presidential Debate #2

Last night marked the 2nd Presidential Debate of which the format was a town hall style meeting.  I really don’t have a whole lot to comment on the debate other than it was rather dry, and I felt more like I was watching two Democrats in a primary debate, rather than two members of differing parties vying for the Presidency.  When people are given the choice between a real Democrat and a fake one –  they’ll choose the real one every time.

Barr None At Press Conference

It would appear as though my prediction, is at least partially right, although there seems to be some trouble brewing. It would appear that the Libertarian Presidential Candidate Bob Barr, did not show at the press conference hosted by Ron Paul, with the unconfirmed report being that it “just wasn’t worth it.” In my opinion this was a huge mistake on Barr’s part as the third party candidate that is doing best in the polls. As potential fallout, I see Barr possibly not even hitting the $1 million mark in campaign contributions, and his 6% that he has been clinging to in the polls, drifting to dismally low levels in the coming days.

On the flip-side, Bob Barr has invited Dr. Paul to be his vice-presidential running mate in the upcoming election, with Wayne Allan Root stepping aside to make it happen. If anything, I would say it would be best if Bob took Wayne’s spot, and Ron took the slot at the head of the ticket. Even if that were the offer I doubt that Dr. Paul would agree to it.

With the outlook rather bleak as far as getting any noticeable media attention for this press conference or third party candidates in general, I would recommend a course of action that may not have been considered — Ron Paul running as a Republican write-in. This move would certainly win him no favors within the party, but there are a couple of advantages to taking this route.

First, by running as a Republican write-in, Dr. Paul keeps his promise of staying within the Republican Party, and not running as a 3rd party candidate. The downside to this is that he will not have ballot access in a number of states due to strict ballot access laws, but he will still have access in some states.

Second, by choosing this route, it would not be possible for Dr. Paul to win, as there would be no way to secure enough electoral college votes. However, he would certainly be able to get the 15% necessary in the polls to participate in the debates and bring attention to the cause of Liberty and third party access (I stand corrected – he would not have his name on enough ballots, therefore he would not be eligible).

Another possible scenario that would likely get good results follows my announcement prediction to some extent. In this scenario, a large donor (a Ross Perot type) would purchase major network air time (this would take a lot of money), and would host their own debate, inviting the other candidates as well, but with guidelines suggested by Dr. Paul in order to avoid problems with McCain/Fiengold legislation. This would bring attention to the cause of liberty, as well as help to open the field for third party candidates in the future.

Well, there you have it. We have such great momentum going forward right now and I would hate to see it fizzle out due to snubs and such. Even if my advice isn’t taken (and I don’t expect anyone to listen to this Michigander), we must continue to push forward with the message of Liberty, even though it seems the field of presidential candidates is… shall we say, “slim pickens.”

Ron Paul Announcement Prediction

Yesterday, this press release was posted on the Campaign For Liberty Blog.

—–

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jesse Benton
September 5, 2008

ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA – On the heels of his historic three-day rally in Minneapolis that drew over 12,000 attendees, Congressman Ron Paul will make a major announcement next week in Washington at the National Press Club.

More details will be announced Monday.

—–

People have been giddy with excitement and trying to guess what this huge announcement will be, and I have made my prediction. There have been some off-wall-predictions, others that have some merit, but I think mine is the one that’s right (doesn’t everybody think theirs is right?). So here is what I think…

With invites to Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin, as well as rumored invites to Nader and McKinney for the announcement, my guess is that Dr. Paul, C4L and the various third parties will be combining their smaller sums of cash to purchase major airtime on major networks (much like Ross Perot did) to have their own televised debates, and guess who won’t be invited? Of course, they could choose to invite the two major party contenders to expose their flawed policy stances, but I would be surprised if either one would accept such an invitation.

If you think about it, it really makes sense. Instead of spending the “smaller” amounts of money they all have on their own — for little exposure; they can combine it and blow the whole wad on one of the biggest political surprises of all time. Sounds like a plan to me… what say you?

Obama 4 Censorship

I discovered something quite by accident today which I find rather alarming. An Obama supporter had left a comment on my blog the other day, and I had checked out their blog and followed a link to an Obama video on Youtube. I began watching the video and typing comments concerning areas that I thought were weak policy statements as I listened the video. Upon posting the rather lengthy comment I received the message – “Comment Pending Approval.”

I thought the message was a little odd, so I began to sift through the many pages of comments on numerous Barack Obama videos (official postings of the campaign on their Youtube Channel), and I discovered that there was not one negative comment posted unless it was racist towards Obama. The conclusion of course is obvious; Barack Obama is censoring comments that would point to weaknesses in his policy, but allowing comments that paint him as a victim of racism.

If you go to John McCain or Bob Barr’s Youtube Channels, and you post comments to their videos, they are instantly posted. In fact, there are numerous comments criticizing the candidates themselves and their policy. Why is it that these two men who are running for president can allow for free discussion of the issues, but Barack Obama feels he needs to censor comments that put him and his policy in a negative light? The answer: Because Barack Obama knows that his policy is weak and if people are allowed to discuss it in an open forum, he will lose supporters — plain and simple!

Some people may think this is not a big deal, and that this really isn’t a free speech issue because it is Obama’s private Youtube Channel, and he has a right to censor those that disagree with him. It is true that the Youtube Channel is his “property” (given to him by Youtube to use) and yes, he can censor if he so chooses, but what happens should this man become president? If Candidate Barack Obama feels it necessary to censor political dissidents on something a simple as a Youtube Channel, what lengths will he go to quell free speech as President Obama when people raise their voice in disagreement?

Mr. Obama, if your positions are that weak, and you can’t take the heat… Get out of the kitchen! The last thing we need is a president in the White House who uses the Constitution of the United States as his door mat, and who sets up a “Ministry of Truth” to control the distribution of information.

Find all of this a little hard to believe? Check it out and see for yourself.

Smokin’ Joe Biden

Perhaps “Blowin’ Smoke Joe Biden” or “Tokin’ Joe Biden” would be a more fitting title for the vice presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. I finally got around to watching Joe Biden’s acceptance speech from the Democratic National Convention last week, and let’s just say it was easy to see why I was in no rush to watch it.

Blowin’ Smoke Joe started off with a real winner of a statement: “For every American who is trying to do the right thing, for all those people in government who are honoring the pledge to uphold the law and honor the Constitution…”. Since when does Joe Biden care about upholding the honor of the Constitution? His grilling of Clarence Thomas back in 1991 on the issue of whether or not the Constitution protects property rights (Joe doesn’t seem to be too big on property rights) just goes to show you how little esteem Senator Biden holds for the Constitution of the United States.

Bob Barr On Glenn Beck

Last night Bob Barr appeared for a full hour on Glenn Beck’s show on CNN Headline News. He was on for the full hour, and it was aired at 7pm, 8pm and 9pm. I’m not sure how many had a chance to view the program, but hopefully it will boost Bob’s numbers and help to get him into the debates.

I will say that while I support Bob Barr for the Presidency, he is far from my ideal Libertarian candidate. Many in Libertarian circles wish they would have seen Ron Paul get the Republican nomination, but it just wasn’t meant to be this time around. However, Bob Barr is still the best of all three candidates running for the Office of the Presidency, and he’s the only candidate who’s talking about returning the Presidency to it’s Constitutional limits, as well as putting a stop to wasteful government spending.

One answer that really threw me for a loop from Bob was when he was asked what his favorite Constitutional Amendment was. His response… “The 2nd.” Wow Bob – guns over freedom of speech or property rights??? I think he was caught off guard and just blurted out the first thing that came to mind. Glenn Beck called him on it immediately.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Bob Barr On The Colbert Report

Check out The Colbert Report’s interview with Bob Barr from last night by clicking here. You’ll have to scroll down towards the bottom of the screen before you find the clip.