|
|
Once again, a nominally small government politician has shot himself in the big toe by jumping into completely irrelevant social issues.
Ken Buck halted his political momentum when he compared homosexuality with alcoholism on Meet the Press. (See “Buck’s remarks spur backlash in close senate race.”)
The inconsistency between a belief in small government and a belief that adults’ private lives is the government’s business is startling.
When asked about homosexuality, a politician should say, “I’m not concerned with other peoples’ sex lives, and it sure as hell isn’t the governments’ business.”
If your religion makes it your business, the better tactic is to use the love of your god to change things, not the brute force and compulsion of the state.
Allow me to say in the nicest way possible that the Norton versus Buck race for the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate is a sideshow. My friends are passionate about which candidate deserves the Republican nomination. I appreciate that passion. Nevertheless, they are arguing over the deck chairs on the Titanic. Should they face starboard? Or stern?
Does it really matter? Republicans have failed to shrink the federal government since… uh… ever. Ever? Yep, ever.
Does it really matter which Colorado Republican wins the nomination? There is no reason to think, that after 150 years of failed small-government rhetoric, the GOP will finally succeed in shrinking the federal leviathan starting with the elections of 2010. None.
If we refuse to recognize the problem, we can’t solve it. The problem is not who controls the White House. The problem is not which party controls the legislature. If the goal is shrinking the size, power and reach of the federal government, the GOP is a colossal failure. The best the GOP can say is that the cancer might not grow as fast if they have power.
That ain’t good enough. If we accept that as good enough, WE are the problem. We can pretend the deck chairs are important. But it is a fantasy.
Granted, that there are valid arguments about which way the deck chairs should face. But why are is anyone arguing about something so trivial? Let’s try to stop the ship from sinking.
And the ship is taking on water. It is listing. It is just a matter of time before Kate Winslet finally lets go of Leonardo DiCaprio. And that water is COLD.
I admire the dedication of each of you in either the Norton or Buck camps. Your hearts are in the right place. But until we make systemic change in our government, we are deciding between shrimp or beef at the Titanic buffet while our shoes get wet with salt water… we keep arguing over the buffet selection while the water passes our knees… then our belts… then our shoulders… and we act as if picking the shrimp is important.
The entree ain’t important when the chafing dishes are floating away…
P.S. I love me some boiled shrimp with cocktail sauce.
For example: The race for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Colorado is between Jane Norton and Ken Buck.
And the Republicans are the “small government” party?
Am I the only one that finds this laughable? What am I missing, people?
(The race between Norton and Buck is just a current example. I’ll be glad to provide a list of Big Government Republican programs, but most Republicans acknowledge their failure.)
When so-called conservatives vote for big government politicians, they perpetuate the problem. They are the problem. It’s not the fault of “progressive” Democrats. It’s the fault of “conservative” Republicans.
Until Republicans stop this inconsistency, they have no one to blame but themselves.
We must reject the big government two-party duopoly. Don’t waste your vote on the status quo, because the status quo means more government. The Republican excuse that they don’t grow government as fast as the Democrats is not good enough.
We get the government we ask for. I implore you to quit asking for big government. I implore you to quit voting for big government politicians, whether or not they have an “R” by their name.
I only have suggestions. I don’t have a magic solution. But I know continuing down this path is pure folly.
I suggest joining a third party. I suggest supporting approval voting. If you don’t like those ideas, come up with something else, I implore you. I beg for your creativity in solving this problem. Republicans have a 150 year record of failing to shrink government. Thinking they’ll start now is belied by history. I don’t want a flame war. I’m not trying to gore anyone’s ox. I’m desperately looking for an answer to save this country. Give me some ideas. Please.
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.
My predictions (as I predicted!) on the recent Colorado caucuses were mostly wrong. (See “The Big Government Republican Politburo has made its selections, but they’ll let you vote anyway.”)
I did not anticipate how well either Democrat Andrew Romanoff or Republican Ken Buck would do as the underdog in their respective Senate races. Romanoff beat Democratic establishment pick and incumbent Senator Michael Bennet, while Buck was in a virtual tie with Big Government Republican Politburo choice Jane Norton. (See “ Underdogs Buck, Romanoff make strong inroads at caucuses.”) (Although I did get the Republican governor’s race correct – Dan Maes was stomped by Big Government Republican Politburo selection Scott McInnis). I have learned a lesson. I learned that the caucuses are meaningless. In both of the major parties, the activists show up in force at the caucuses. They represent an almost insignificant number of voters, but they are active. Hence the name “activists.”
Nevertheless, the Big Government Republican Politburo will not be defeated by mere activists. The BGRP has the money. The BGRP has the power. The BGRP’s annointed one, Jane Norton, will be the Republican Party’s nominee, regardless of the number of Ken Buck activists.
Likewise, Bennet will be the Democratic nominee. The irony is that I bet almost all of Buck’s supporters would agree with my assessment of the Democratic primary, yet they fail to see the parallels within their own party.
If you want real choice and a return to limited government, work outside the two party system. (For that matter, if you want single payer health care, or even a public option, you will not get it from the Democrats. David Sirota and his progressive statists should work outside the two party system, as well.)
The Democrats and Republicans have had control of the government since the Civil War. Their is no rational basis to believe things will change in 2010. The government has consistently grown since the 1860’s. The faith some have in the two party system to effectuate change is misplaced. And it is faith. It is not based on any objective standards.
Many in the Republican Party point to Ronald Reagan’s two terms as a the height of Republican success. Yet the fact is government did not contract during Reagan’s terms. It continued to grow. Is it not obvious? If the zenith of modern Republican success resulted in more Big Government, why support the party?
Seriously. Why?
I challenge the supporters of Ken Buck and Dan Maes to vote their consciences in November. Do not vote for BGRP choices just because they have an “R” by their name. That perpetuates the problem.
Be part of the solution. Reject the party apparatus that maintains the status quo.
I attended an R Block Party event this evening at the Old Mill Brewery in Littleton.
The highlight of the event was the fireworks provided by former U. S. Representative and Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo. He railed against recent Republican presidential nominee John McCain as a big government, liberal Republican. But he did not stop there. He painted former Lt. Governor and current Colorado Republican candidate for U. S. Senate Jane Norton with the same can of paint. Tancredo professed his belief that McCain is doing his best to recruit big government Republican candidates throughout the country, including Norton, in an effort to continue his failed statist legacy. Tancredo said Norton fits the McCain mold, and that he could not support her candidacy. Tancredo made it clear he thinks neither McCain nor Norton believe in conservative principles.
Tancredo said he supports Weld County D.A. Ken Buck in the Republican race for the Senate nomination. Of his failed bid for the Presidencey, Tancredo told the crowd of about 60 activists that he never for a second thought he would win. He said his presidential campaign was a tool to educate the country on the problem of illegal immigration.
Nikki Mata and Lori Horn, as usual, did a tremendous job organizing the event, which was focused on educating activists on the caucus process. Several people had the opportunity to speak, including the candidates in attendance. Dan Maes, candidate for governor, Polly Lawrence, candidate for state House District 44, Derec Shuler, candidate for state Senate District 34, and Lora Thomas, candidate for Douglas County coroner, were among the candidates who addressed the audience. Nikki and Lori were even kind enough to give me, as the President of the public advocacy group the Gadsden Society, the opportunity to say a few words about the Colorado legislative process and how to keep advised on pending bills. I recommended everyone follow state Rep. Kent Lambert on Twitter for his updates on the state budget process.
The Republican power brokers in DC have spoken: The annointed Norton shall prevail. Buck and Frazier can take their feeble attempts to storm the castle and go home.
All independent and libertarian-minded Colorado Republicans can remain supplicant and accept the status quo or….. not.
It’s up to you.
|
Help Liberty on the Rocks (Denver) Grow. Donate Today!
Get Happy Hour Reminders!
|
