Two Big Government Guys Debate

Romney Obama 2 SC Two Big Government Guys Debate

(Editor’s note: The opinions presented here are strictly those of the author alone.)

Watching the second Obama-Romney debate Tuesday night was like taking a trip back in political time.

Obama calling for more government jobs and cheaper education loans to lift us out of the recession.

Romney threatening to use tariffs against the Chinese if they don’t jack up their currency’s value so America can regain the manufacturing prowess we really haven’t lost.

Was I back in the recession of ’49 or ’53? What’s a “tariff” anyway?

And haven’t we heard that tough talk from Republicans about smaller government, fiscal responsibility, lower and simpler taxes, and less regulations before? Like for the last five decades? Like $16 trillion ago?

Foreign policy sounded just as familiar.

The two men out-neo-conned each other on our interventionist Middle East policy, which has been a tragic and bloody bipartisan failure for 60 years.

Instead of questioning our aggressive presence in that backward region, they wasted their time arguing over whose fault it was our Libyan ambassador didn’t have the protection he needed, or who said the stupidest thing in the wake of that fiasco.

Their boasting and strutting and interrupting about who was going to do more to assure America’s energy independence sounded familiar too, only this time I think I heard one of them call it “energy security.”

Total energy independence for America — like bringing peace and civilized behavior to the Middle East — is an impossible and stupid promise that only the politicians who say it every four years think is not impossible and stupid.

In a global marketplace, worrying about energy independence is about as silly as saying we’ve got to achieve steel independence or chocolate independence. If the federal government got out of the business of limiting oil and gas production on the land it owns (which it shouldn’t own anyway), we’d have all the energy we need.

The longer the “debate” went on, the weirder it got. Obamney and Romma were dancing around on the stage so much I lost track of who was the Big Government guy and who was the Bigger Government guy.

Both swore allegiance to the Second Amendment. But neither said a peep about actually shrinking the welfare/warfare beast in Washington. They just tried to come up with cleverer ways to tax people they don’t like so they can keep spending more on their pet expenditures — college loans and more union teachers for Obama, more aircraft carriers for Romney.

There was no talk from either man about slashing federal spending. No talk about making income taxes flatter or fairer or nonexistent. No talk about getting the federal government totally out of education, health care, energy, and 99 percent of all the other things it does to make our lives less free, more expensive, and more annoying.

And how about those questions Candy Crowley chose from our fellow citizens, whose participation in the democratic process is so vital to our choosing the president who’s going to mess up the next four years? One word comes to mind — pathetic.

Of course they’re undecided voters. Not one had a clue about what’s wrong or right about the country or what role government should or should not play in the lives of an allegedly free people.

Didn’t one Long Islander wonder what Romney or Obama thinks about the horrible damage done to America by the bipartisan drug war? Or domestic drones? Or the TSA? Their questions could have come from a bunch of third graders — or the White House press pool.

After enduring Wednesday night’s duet in big-government bipartisanship, the average Ron Paul libertarian was, as usual, left somewhere between depressed and suicidal.

There was no choice, not even a lesser evil. Obama’s been a disaster with his warmed up New Deal ideas. Romney sounds like Nelson Rockefeller with better family values. Either way, it’s four more years.

People wonder why libertarians say they can’t tell the difference between Republicans and Democrats. It’s because there really isn’t any.

Photo credit: Cory M. Grenier (Creative Commons)

Bypass the Mass Media: Get Articles Straight To Your Inbox!


Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.


Comments

  1. So….what I gather your trying to say is: Let’s all sit around, in our red sweaters (like Mr. Rogers…R.I.P.), hold hands and sing Kum-bi-yah? (sp?) It was a Liberal Moderator, and a very p-poor one at that. Who was allowed to pick and choose the questions. Your correct on that one. They all sounded as if they came from 3rd graders. Really? Asking Gov. Romney how he would be different from President Bush? Why wasn’t that question put to Nobama? Only changing the names. Hey President, how would you be any different than Jimmy Carter? Ron Paul is out of the equasion, OK? So, now you have two choices. A muslim fraud with no history, that is undoubtedly not eligible to hold the office of the Presidency, and lives by the ideals of Carl Marx. Or, a self made millionaire, yeah, done the hard way, that is honorable, very charitable, believes in GOD, family, the Constitution, a proven track record of being a successful businessman that can balance a budget, and give us all hope for a free America that we once knew? Yes, we do have choices. So, I pray you choose wisely.

  2. Whether you call yourselves; The Western Center for Journalism or Fox News: The American Media can not re-establish creditably with the masses until they stop ignoring the bogus paperwork our current president has presented! It is like ignoring a dead elephant in a phone booth. Who is our President? What is his real name? Does he have a legal right to be the president? How foolish are you going to let this get, before you snap out of your comma? Resolve this question and put it to rest. Continuing to attempt to ignore this most pressing issue only erodes your credibility more. Before your very eyes, the mass media is mutating adapting and changing. If you value your jobs, I would strongly advise you start doing them !!!

  3. It is simply mind boggling that after decades of the two (one?) party monopoly and collusion to exclude anything but big government spending, interventionist tactics of their partnership, the public has not become aware enough and fed up enough to consider that these liars are not going to change the destruction of the constitution and march toward a World Government. A third party (mine is Libertarian) would be viable if enough people said “enough is enough” and stopped enabling the collusion of socialist/democrat — neo-con/republican constitution shredding.

  4. If the democrats proposed tearing down the Washington monument the republicans who propose how to do it in three steps. Voting either candidate is like rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic. As for me I’m voting for Tom Hoefling of Americas Party, an associate of Alan Keyes. Some may say I’m wasting my vote by voting for a third party, but we need to vote who we think is the right candidate and leave the results up to God, for only He can sustain our nation. It is certainly what our founding fathers believed.

Speak Your Mind