For U.S. Senate, I will be voting for whomever emerges the winner of the primary between Libertarian candidates John Finger and Maclyn Stringer.
Looking at the Republican primary, however, is interesting. The contest, for practical purposes, is between front-runners Jane Norton and Ken Buck. I could not support Norton. She supported Referendum C as Lt. Governor of Colorado and she has John McCain’s support. She is a certified Big Government Republican.
Buck says all the right thing concerning small government. I hope he has the fortitude to back up his words. The problem is, however, he does not have a record to critique like Norton does. He is a District Attorney, not a legislator. He has not had to make tough votes on tough issues. He can make promises, but he has no small government resume. As a DA, he has not had the opportunity. That is not his fault, but it is a fact.
I am generally wary of DA’s in political office. They come from a “law and order” background, and tend to support government intrusions into our Constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. There is a tension between the peoples’ Fourth Amendment rights and the government’s legitimate need to preserve order. I personally would like to see the tension resolved in favor of the Fourth Amendment. Law enforcement types generally – and I said “generally” – do not.
Buck has lots of Tea Party support, and I understand why. He talks the talk – but he’s never had to stroll the stroll. Forgive me for being cynical about another Republican making small government promises. Talk is like Ramen Noodles: Cheap and unfulfilling.
Republicans have not been faithful to their purported love of liberty. Republicans have betrayed liberty more frequently and with more partners than Tiger Woods has betrayed Elin. I will no longer be a cuckold.
Others are willing to believe that, this time, the Republican candidate actually means it when he promises to be true. I hope Buck is up to the task of resisting the temptation.
Unfortunately, it probably will not matter. The Big Government Republican Politburo has annointed Norton the candidate – and she will be annointed. Buck outnumbers Norton in grassroots activists by a lot. Norton, however, outnumbers Buck in bucks. According to the Denver Post,
Norton has four times the campaign money that Buck has.
The power of the politburo’s pocketbook will prevail. This is part of the systemic problem with out political process. We do not need “campaign finance” to keep people (including the people that form unions, corporations and other organizations) from making donations. We need a new voting system. We need to strip the two-party duopoly of its power by giving people more than two choices for such important offices.
Approval voting meets both of these goals. With approval voting, small government candidates would not be forced, as a practical matter, to run under the Big Government Republican banner.
Under our current system of plurality voting, Buck is going to lose the Big Government Republican primary. Buck supporters will then be told by the politburo that they can either vote for Big Government Republican Norton or the Democrat. Any system that results in such a choice is not worthy of existence.
I invite all the Buck supporters to abandon the Big Government Republican Party once Buck is officially discarded by the politburo. Yes, that will help the Democrat win. But we have to look beyond 2010. We have to look ahead to the next generation and the next. If we really want our grandchildren to live under a free nation, we must reject the current failed system and its process. We can, and must, replace it. We can not enable the process, even if the withdrawal might be painful
If we enable the current broken process, we are part of the problem. In fact, anyone that votes for another Big Government politician just because they have an “R” by their name IS the problem. You will have given your sanction to Big Government by voting for a Big Government candidate.
Don’t waste your vote like that.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” –John Quincy Adams
===
The same analysis applies to the Tea Party support of Dan Maes for governor. The Big Government Republican politburo has annointed Scott McInnis. McInnis will be the Big Government Republican candidate.
I love the Tea Party movement. I spoke at the event on tax day 2009 before about 8,000 people and am scheduled to speak at the
upcoming event on tax day 2010.
Claude Ford, of Arvada, asks a question about the movement in his letter to the editor published in today’s Denver Post. (See “
Faces of the Tea Party,” second letter). It says:
The outrageous policies of the Bush administration have led directly to the financial and economic collapse we are experiencing now. Columnists Mike Littwin, Paul Krugman and other fine journalists sounded the alarm bell on the impending perils of these policies.
Were letter-writer Nanette McBride (April 3) and other Tea Party-goers asleep for eight years? Their failure to protest then makes their protests now seem far more political than patriotic.
Claude Ford, Arvada
Regardless of his approval of Paul Krugman, Mr. Ford’s overall point is correct. There was no Tea Party movement while George W. Bush and the Republicans outrageously expanded government.
There is, however, a political group, formed right here in Colorado, that has been speaking out against both Big Government Republicans and Democrats since 1971. The
Libertarian Party has been around for decades and will be around long after the last tea cup is put away.
Believers in small government have a home, and it is not the party of George W. Bush, John McCain, Jane Norton, Bill Owens or Scott McInnis. That a political party can espouse small government, yet consistently support Big Government candidates, is absurd. But the joke is on the rank-and-file Republicans who actually believe in small government. And I know there are lots of you out there.
After the GOP nominates Big Government candidates, the GOP politburo will look at you and say, “What? You have to vote for our Big Government candidates. What ya gonna do, vote for the Democrat? You have no choice. HA HA HA HA.”
You do have a choice. The two party system is not in the Constitution. Neither is plurality voting, which keeps the two-party duopoly in power. I hear well-meaning people say, “well, we have a two-party system and we just have to live with that.”
Hogwash.
Did Sam Adams say to his cousin John, “we live in a monarchy and we just have to live with it.” Hell no, he did not. They fought. For years and years. And were eventually victorious.
Join the fight against all Big Government politicians, regardless of the letter after their name. Do not accept the false choice of the Big Government Democrat or the Big Government Republican. If you do, you perpetuate the problem. I know you want to solve the problem.
Let’s have some tea.
