Monday, May 26, 2008

Some Election Notes

As we near the end for Lady MacBeth and her unholy crusade — "Vote for me, in case the otehr guy gets shot!" — here's a thought from my pal James Wesley Rawles over at the Survival Blog, particularly germaine as look at the first unabashedly socialist candidate to run for the Presidency:
Ponder what socialism does: In essence, in redistributes wealth, by force. Even if that force has a friendly American face, under the color of law, with a neat and orderly system of taxation, it is nonetheless still force. The bottom line is that under the socialist model, without my consent, some of my earnings are forcibly extracted from me and eventually put into the hands of another citizen that did not earn them. If I refuse to pay my taxes, then I will pay huge fines and/or go to prison. Period.
I hate like heck to see Bob Barr get into the race on the Libertarian ticket. I am a gut-level fire-breathing libertarian, and I have shaken Bob Barr's hand and called him an American hero. But here's the reality — every vote for Bob Barr is a vote for a socialist America, an America that is antithesis for everything we have fought for and dreamed of. Every vote for Bob Barr is a vote to repudiate the Second Amendment, a vote to strip Americans of their firearms rights.

This one is for all the marbles, folks. We can't afford to cast a feel-good vote!


Anonymous said...

We currently have wealth distribution in the country, though not the extent that bHo would have it. Look at the recent "stimulus" or "tax rebate" that most American receive. Even those who don't pay taxes receive it. The wealthiest Americans that pay the most in taxes are not eligible for this rebate. Look at all the social spending, spending to support welfare programs and schooling for illegals. All forced on working Americans.

America is a socialist state now, just not the extent that it would be under bHo. I would venture to say, bHo would love it if this country would go right past socialist to communist...with him in charge.

Anonymous said...

I agree, I truly wonder at Bob's motives, he must know the consequences. I am a fan of his, from watching him on the floor, on C span, and going toe to toe with the anti's. He was a staunch supporter of the 2ndA. I wish he had run as a replubican early or maybe McCain could ask him for VP.

Anonymous said...

MB--I am totally dismayed by Barr's self-centered move into the Libertarian nomination--He may well become the Ralph Nader or Ross Perot spoiler of this election--to our everlasting detriment! Can not anyone talk some sense into his thick head so that he realizes the consequences of his short-sighted and self-centered action?? dmd

Anonymous said...

A Vote for McCain is a vote for Socialism lite (or slow).

We don't we work to elect the good guy istead of bitching that he is in the race?

Anonymous said...

We were told that voting for W would be good for gun rights. I think Wayne LaPeirre said we would have an office in the white house.

Fast forward ... W gave us gun confiscation in New Orleans, W would have signed the AW Ban if it passed, W gave us a vicious ATF intent on shutting down all gun stores, W gave us the Solictor General who argued that "shall not be infringed" means the government can regulate and even ban guns .... So tell me again why voting for "the winnable" candidate was a good idea.

McCain wants to close the gun show loophole .... and once he's done with that he'll close the private sale loophole, then he'll close the selling of any gun loophole. In my eyes, McCain's and Obama's second amendment positions are only different in what gets banned. Neither is advocating less gun control.

But there is a candidate that is advocating for less gun control ... Bob Barr. My vote is going for freedom and I hope my fellow gun owners will do the same. Voting for McCain means you are voting for gun control.

I'm voting for Barr and my childrens future.

Roberta X said...

All due respect, but "the first unabashedly socialist candidate to run for the Presidency" is probably
this guy starting in 1900.

As time went on, the far, Red Left was getting enough votes that another party "reached out to them" especially when the economy fell on hard times, and eventually found itself profoundly changed; we know 'em as today's Democrats.

That snake's been in the grass for a long, long time.

I don't think Bob Barr is a good fit for the LP; he'd make a better Constitution Party guy, or, batter yet, a Veep for McCain. As it stands, I don't see myself voting for McCain and certainly not anyone to the Left of him.