We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

I decided to endorse McCain/Palin

Many of you will remember that back before the Democratic primary I was one of those who argued for a term of Hillary to help the Republicans understand that small government, liberty minded people won’t vote for the lesser of two evils indefinitely. My goal was and is always long term and I think four years of Hillary would have been a Carteresque setup for a popular swing in the direction of personal liberty and small government.

Three factors I didn’t anticipate have changed the dynamic since then. Any one of them would be an argument against that plan but, taken together, they add up to a veto. First: Obama is not Hillary. Not by a long shot. Hillary is a fairly typical opportunist politician who thinks socialist programs have a place in a free society. She is badly mistaken but not a serious threat to America itself. I think she is at the core an American citizen before she is a ‘Citizen of the World’. She tests the winds of American public opinion and that public could survive and learn from a Hillary Clinton presidency.

Obama is a cipher. He is like a Russian matryoshka doll. Nobody except perhaps his closest associates know what is at the core. The best estimate is to look at his friends and mentors and what their values are. That topic has been thoroughly discussed and some reasonable people place him solidly in a group of hard core totalitarians. If we ignore his promises shifting like smoke on the wind, his closest core group seems to be fired by hatred and revenge against America in general and the US Constitution in particular. Certainly that is what his confidants and advisers (and wife) say in public.

Second: Palin is not Romney or Giuliani or any of the other candidates that looked likely to be on the ticket with McCain. She is the most recognizably small-government, libertarian leaning candidate on a major party ticket certainly since Reagan, I think since Goldwater. She has proven her credibility with the trail of bodies in her wake. I have no doubt that she was offered any amount of inducements to turn a blind eye toward corrupt associates. She is an articulate defender of federalism and seems to be the only person outside of a few legal scholars that understands the nature and history of the role the Vice President of the United States has as the President of the Senate. I suspect that, as corrupt as this Senate unquestionably is, she may go into history as the one who took that role back to its constitutional purpose. Would that she leaves a similar trail of bodies in the Senate; it is certainly a target rich environment. Just for the record, the last President pro tempore was Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and the current President pro tempore is Senator Robert ‘King of Pork’ Byrd. If elected V.P. she will have the Constitutional authority to take over that role. If she does and leaves as big of an imprint on the Senate as they have, we’re in for a good time; buy popcorn. Don’t for a minute underestimate her potential to seriously upset the apple cart pork barrel.

Regarding the emotionally charged ‘libertarians’ attacking Palin, anybody who is holding out for a vehement hard core atheist, isolationist, big “L” Libertarian to be in the top spot is detached from reality in other ways too. I am amazed by all of these alleged libertarians attacking Palin for her personal beliefs while ignoring her political principles. They quite obviously don’t hold to even the basic first principle of individual liberty. Even the advocates for small government and personal liberty who are more tolerant of alternative lifestyle choices (like religion) must realize that a candidate for Vice President who is a moderate, small “L” libertarian is absolutely the best we can do as a first step.

Third: The clincher. The economic turmoil boiling right now is not unprecedented. The last time it happened on this scale, the crash started on a Republican president’s watch and resulted in the New Deal, schemes for packing the Supreme Court to better destroy Constitutional restraints and, ultimately, in an invitation to fascist and communist governments to have a go at world dominance. Roosevelt needed an amendment to change the court system. Obama doesn’t. Also remember, after four years of the worst of the depression’s misery, FDR was reelected by a landslide. Why should it be any different with Obama? This crash, which is an inevitable and substantial correction of regulatory market tampering, is coming right at the most critical phase of an election cycle. It could have come earlier or later, but with the Schumeresque assistance of the MSM it is timed perfectly to trigger an anti free market landslide. It places (Republican) President Bush in the role of (Republican) President Hoover. Under an Obama presidency, it is certain not only that the crash will be far worse than it has to be, but that it will be blamed entirely on ‘the free market policies of President Bush’. This is absurd in so many ways, but do any of you doubt it? Electing Obama will be taken as a clear message that Hoover/Bush Republican ‘free market’ policies are at fault and forever discredited. Electing FDR/Obama (with potentially a super majority in congress) could do for free markets what the Hindenburg did for airships. How apropos that the Hindenburg was destroyed by the incendiary paint job but for decades the blame was wrongly placed on the technology that did the actual lifting. Obama, the Democrats in Congress and the MSM arm of the Democratic party would lock in the perception that free markets caused all of this. At least McCain won’t deliberately try to make things worse so that he can blame Bush, the Republicans and free trade.

Another reason that didn’t make my top three is that already 43% of American ‘tax payers’ pay no taxes. We are getting dangerously close to the point where the people who net more off of government outnumber the people who pay more into it. If we cross that threshold of voters taking versus voters paying, it is a point of no return. It appears certain that we will pass that point early in an Obama administration. Probably before mid-terms. Two years could be too long. It may not matter if the RNC learns its lesson.

44 comments to I decided to endorse McCain/Palin

  • Who had majority in Congress when FDR was elected?

  • Midwesterner

    It was almost a dead heat before the election. After the election, look at the multi year trend. As long as there is a scapegoat to pin it on . . .

    They never did realize FDR was the problem. If Obama wins this time, the same scenario will probably play out again. It is the following elections after 1932 that made the New Deal permanent. Over estimating voters is dangerous.

  • My thoughts too, pretty much, Mid.

    A while back I thought the ONE would be better than the Hildebeast because I thought he didn’t have the cojones for it and would, by his own metrics, cock it up.

    I have since changed my mind. He is spectacularly dangerous and therefore, for all their faults, McCain/Palin have to win.

    A great deal of the anti-Palin stuff from the MSM is… utter rot. She has stated frequently that x,y or z is her personal belief. The MSM don’t do the “p” word though.

    I dunno. I mean it’s like this. Let’s say you don’t have a policy on a, b or c because in a libertarian fashion you think the country is best off without politicians sticking their oars into a, b or indded c. The media will pillory you for “not caring”. They will also pillory you for not attempting some sort of quick fix. Various “affirmative action” programs fall into the “quick fix” category. My experience of the USA is very much that racism is not the way it seems to have been at all. It is of course still a problem and one that “quick fixes” merely prolong but heck accentuate the positive folks! These things take time and within that context it isn’t so long since Rosa Parks decided to rest her weary feet by sitting down in the wrong part of the bus.

    There is now the utterly perverse possibility of a black man who attended Harvard becoming president and still bitchin’ about the US’s endemic racism. Well, that’s an example but it’s typical of Obama’s student union politics which he clearly never grew out of.

    It reminds me of this. Which is amusing when they aren’t the de facto leader of the free world and custodian of a thermonuclear “football”.

    Oh, I dunno. I can still though imagine Barry fucking up big-time and being a one-termer. Bloody hell though. What a bleeding mess Mrs palin or however would have to clean-up though.

  • Barrack Hussein Obama is another Anthony Charles Lynton Blair.Let him get his hands on your country and you are fucked! Right royally. Obama will use his first term to consolidate power,sign you up to emasculating treaties and regulations,the full horror of which will only emerge when he has gone.
    Look what 12 years of the New Labour Project did to Britain.You can’t be a successful libertarian if someone else owns your soul.

  • Bob G

    Re: The Hindenburg paintjob comment; I’m pretty sure that this theory has been debunked. Yes, it was inflammable, but probably less so than traditional dope. Yes, it added to the flame temperature, but only after the ship was well ablaze. The hydrogen, probably aided by the sub-standard and overtightned bracing wires, is quite sufficient to explain the disaster.
    Not sure what that says for the actual economic analysis. I’d like to believe it all, but I’m not sure…

    Bob G.

  • You guys call yourself libertarians? You’re pathetic.

  • Paul Marks

    Senator Obama is very different from Mr Blair – as much as I dislike Mr Blair I wish that Senator Obama was like him.

    Sadly too many of us have compared Senator Obama to people like Anthony Blair or President Carter – he is a very different sort of person. Barack Obama will lie and cheat for the cause – but he does have a cause. He is person trained from his most early years in the cause of Marxist collectivism.

    As for Congress – people like Speaker Pelosi and Majority Whip Durbin are not the sort of Democrat who was powerful in Congress in the 1930′s. They are vastly worse – and will offer no effective break on a President Barack Obama.

    The media is a good example of what will happen (although there are many other examples).

    Hillary Clinton might have tried to, for example, get talk radio off the air – but the lady is personally unpopular (even with many people inside the mainstream media) and her efforts would have got nowhere.

    Barack Obama is a saint to the mainstream media – they will support any tactics he uses to eleminate the minority of the media that is nonleftist.

    And, no, the Supreme Court will not be in a position to block such moves – because they will be done in such a way that will not involve court cases.

    If dissenting media is eliminated recovery is very difficult – no matter how bad the economic effects of “President Obama’s” policies.

    For example, mass unemployment may be the result of such things as compulsory unionism (getting rid of the secret ballot and so on), but it will be presented as the result of greedy capitalists shipping jobs overseas.

  • Paul Marks

    “The internet Paul, the internet”.

    Ho hum, if the “internet” was going to determine elections then John McCain would win by a landslide. After all, to take one example, the fact that Barack Obama was trained by the Marxist (although heretical “economic justice” Marxist) Frank Russel Davis has been on the Accuracy in Media website (and many other places) since Febuary 18th.

    Education and the mainstream media influence where most people are receptive to on the internet and even where they go.

    “You are wrong Paul” – tomorrow will show I am not.

    “What is it do with you anyway – you Englishman”

    If the United States falls the West can not stand – that is why it is my business.

    Defeat in the Cold War – that is what stares us in the face.

    Better people than me will not give up even in the face of defeat tomorrow – they will carry on the struggle against the Marxists hopeing for victory in a few election (and hopeing that future elections will not be Chicago style farces).

    One element of hope – most Americans still want smaller government, not bigger government.

  • Bod

    Paul,

    I think you’re spot-on regarding the differences between Obama and Tone – they’re very different beasts. And the immediate future looks bleak. If The One prevails tomorrow we’re in for a rough four years, because I anticipate that the democrats will consolidate their hold on Congress too.

    I’d love to have to eat my own words in 48b hours time, but I predict Obama will win by a squeaker tomorrow, and the only thing stopping it being an extremely rough 4 years is Obama’s pusillanimous character. Maybe I’m reading him wrong but he doesn’t brook criticism well at all and the first 100 hours may be decisive in gelding the bull here.

    If he is cowed by some solid, inescapable and very public evidence that his candidacy was tainted (‘hellloooooo America!’) then maybe he’ll blink before he nominates a coterie of Chicago radicals as his inner circle. Maybe his predilection for voting ‘present’ will continue and the sheer volume of ‘society levelling’ legislation will be reduced.

    But I ain’t holding my breath. Very depressed over here. Locked in an office load of Obama fetishists.

    Pity me.

  • Alice

    Notable, Mid, that you lay out good & cogent reasons for voting against the Obamination — not for voting FOR John McCain (except for his fine choice of VP running mate).

    That is the heart of the problem right there — we are not looking at the success of Obama’s closet Marxism, we are looking at the failure of the Republican party. Not so long ago, Republicans had House, Senate, President — and they behaved as truffle-snuffling porkers while growing government and running up the debt. Now they cannot even nominate a presidential candidate worthy of a vote.

    But the wheel turns. Nothing lasts for ever. Pax Americana was always destined to follow Pax Britannica and Pax Romanum into the pages of history. If Obama is the one destined to saw off the branch he has spent his life sitting on, so be it. The human race will survive and (eventually) reach new heights.

  • Sunfish

    In August I had pretty much made up my mind for Bob Barr. I thought that McCain would grab Romney (of the gun bans and healthcare mandates) or Huckabee (assclown southern populist for Jesus in drag).

    I’m with you halfway. I voted for Palin. She’s right where she needs to be on guns and every other aspect of the power balance between the government and the public. She’s right where she needs to be on official corruption.[1] Sure, she’s wrong on gay marriage but there’s a proven track record of her following the law even when her personal beliefs would dictate otherwise.

    Besides, as far as her daughter being pregnant…I can only imagine how my parents would have acted. I don’t think they’d have been nearly as graceful about it.

    Some old guy from Arizona (“..so, forget he’s a jackass whose liberally-prone…”), well…he’s just the price we pay for getting someone good in 2012.

    Thread hijack: Colorado commentariat: get off your gorram couches and go pull a lever for Schaffer, for the love of all that is holy. And if you live in the 7th CD, I don’t know who John Lerew is but Ed Perlmutter needs to be sold into slavery in a brothel in the Bekaa Valley or something.

    That is all.

    [1] Two months later, I STILL haven’t heard a single cop saying that her alleged attempt to have Tpr. Wooten fired was wrong. Either the “Blue Wall of Silence” is BS or he really needed to go and she really needed to get rid of him.

  • Sunfish

    And, no, the Supreme Court will not be in a position to block such moves – because they will be done in such a way that will not involve court cases.

    How would Uncle Sam do anything in order to place it beyond the court’s reach?

  • Dave

    If we ignore his promises shifting like smoke on the wind

    Except he hasn’t changed a damn thing his entire campaign… can’t say that for McPalin.

    She [Palin] is an articulate defender of federalism and seems to be the only person outside of a few legal scholars that understands the nature and history of the role the Vice President of the United States has as the President of the Senate.

    Except that that ISN’T the role of the VP… the VP is an executive assistant to the President, and part of the Executive branch, to have LITTLE TO NO SAY in the Judicial/Legislative branches, except in the event of a tie vote in the Senate.

    I am amazed by all of these alleged libertarians attacking Palin for her personal beliefs while ignoring her political principles.

    Despite the fact that her personal beliefs majorly and obviously contradict her political principles? “Family values” with an unwed, 17 year-old daughter, more than $50k in family travel expenses taken from the tax payers, and a “hockey mom” who spends $150,000 in two months on clothing? Riiiiight…

    This crash, which is an inevitable and substantial correction of regulatory market tampering

    If by that you mean “consequence of legislation McCain helped author and get passed”, then you’d be correct. So go ahead and vote for the guy who fucked your economy over.

    Under an Obama presidency, it is certain not only that the crash will be far worse than it has to be, but that it will be blamed entirely on ‘the free market policies of President Bush’.

    Despite 99% of Americans getting a tax CUT, regulations placed on oil industries, Wall Street, and health care to prevent such collapses in the future, and the support of Warren Buffet. Good luck with that.

    Another reason that didn’t make my top three is that already 43% of American ‘tax payers’ pay no taxes.

    If by “43% of American ‘tax payers’” you mean “67% of multi-million dollar corporations”, you’d again be correct.

    Conservative ignorance is mind-boggling to me. You pick and choose exactly which topics you care about, and conveniently enough, the only issues you end up caring about are the ones the GOP candidate agrees with you on. Open your freaking eyes and see that a McPalin campaign will DESTROY our economy before it has any hope of fixing it, and it’ll destroy your civil rights and freedoms even faster.

  • Bod

    Wow. Sounds like we got linked to by DailyKOS!

  • Except he hasn’t changed a damn thing his entire campaign… can’t say that for McPalin.

    Campaign finance.
    Defending Wright.
    Money from lobbyists.
    The Definition of “Middle Class Tax Cuts” ($250, do I hear $200? $200, do I hear $150? $150, do I hear $120? $120, do I hear $100?)
    Talks without precondition
    Clean Coal
    NAFTA

    The list goes on and on. Basically, anything that he has been interviewed hard on, he’s flipped on.

  • You vote for the lesser of two evils and you still get evil. Anyway, I can’t help thinking that the world will be safer with a corrupt and venal Chicago machine politician rather than a crazy old guy who flies into rages and knows he’s gonna die soon.

  • Sunfish

    Was Obama telling the truth about gun control when he told John Lott that he opposed gun ownership entirely, when he voted in the IL senate to criminalise defensive use inside the home, when he argued for a national ban on private-citizen CCW, when he argued for reinstating the 1994 AWB, when he stated that the SCOTUS should rule for DC in Heller, when he said that he supported the way SCOTUS actually did rule in Heller, or when he bought his whitewash commercials funded by “American Hunters’ and Shooters’ Association,” a known Brady front group?

    Was he in favor of a fast withdrawl from Iraq when he privately asked the Iraqi government to delay any withdrawl efforts until next year so that he could take credit for them?

    Was he in favor or opposed to NAFTA/CAFTA?

  • Blair and Obama both consummate actors with the gift to make contact with the public.Both chameleons,all things to all men.Both leftists,remember Blair was a Fabian socialist.Look at the damage he has done to Britain,its institutions and its constitution.
    Both are chancers on the make,they will tack to attain their aims.

  • Eric

    Yeah, you have to be pretty oblivious to think Obama has been playing straight with the voters. I’m no McCain fan, but really, Obama’s first instinct is to lie.

    What really depresses me about US politics is, for the first time, the critical mass of voters who don’t pay taxes is large enough to overwhelm those of us who do. For the life of me I don’t see how the socialists don’t prevail in the end – convincing someone “society” owes them money (and other things) is the easiest thing in the world.

  • Someone

    We have a $54 TRILLION accrual basis debt. I don’t see either mainstream candidates going a thing about it. It was the Republicans that added $11 trillion in Medicare part D alone. If we are going to endeavor to make good and just half of these unfunded entitlements, taxes will have to go up across the board. I don’t see an electable Republican having the balls to even try doing that, so we’re set for a huge swing in taxes no matter who gets elected. Greater taxes will shrink the economy, and require even more taxes as a percentage. I have no doubt that once taxes go up, and the misery increases, social stability will be compromised. BOTH parties are on this road and neither party has shown any proclivity of taking a different one. So our destiny is before us and is inevitable.

    So the question merely is how fast or how slow. The day of reckoning most likely will come faster under Democrats who will find a way to make even more centrally controlled, unfunded promises and increase taxes faster. The Republicans will reach the same end point, just slower. And in either case, social stability will be hugely compromised. So when is it best to have a society collapse, at 45 or 65? As a 40 year old, I’d if given a choice between now or later, I’ll take now, and hope that I’ll have a few decades to regrow some equity for my infirm years in a Clear Market environment. If under either pace we are to have a jack-booted Totalitarian society as the result of collapse, I’d much rather die fighting for liberty than rotting away in a forced labor camp.

  • RAB

    Obamas grandmother has just died.
    Oh I could easily do a Wossie on that.

    But how fortuitous or what, for a late sympathy vote if the Polls are off the mark.

    I’ll be back later with something more solid.

  • Paul Marks

    Yes the “typical white person” who was no better than Rev. Wright (“I could no more reject Rev. Wright than I could my white grandmother” in spite of her supposed wicked racist reaction to a black man on a bus), has died. Of course it is “insensitive” to tell the truth about this matter – or any other concerning “The One”.

    A Vice President is just part of the Executive Branch – errrrr.

    “The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote unless they be equally divided”.

    Section Three of Article One – which deals with the Legislative Branch.

    The Executive Brach comes under Article Two – where the Vice President is also mentioned.

    Like the Lord Chancellor in Britain the Vice President is part of both the Legislative and the Executive Branch – in fact, as Vice Presidents have no exectutive role whatever, a Vice President is more the Legislative Branch.

  • Paul Marks

    A Vice President comes under Article One (the Legislative Branch) as well as Article Two (the Executive Branch) – in fact a Vice President has not Constitutional exective role.

    So one can either say that a Vice President is part of the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch (like the old British office of Lord Chancellor – who was part of the Judicial Branch as well, a Trinity of a political office) or one can say that a Vice President comes under the Legislative Branch. But V.P. as part of the Executive only – no that is mistaken.

  • Paul Marks

    “How can dissenting media be eliminated without involving the Supreme Court?”

    Here is one way to eliminate a large bit of it:

    QuietlyTell Rupert M. (the head of News International) that he will be prosecuted for violating some I.R.S. (or other) regulation unless Fox News, the Wall Street Journal (and so on) stop being so irritating.

    He is no hero – he will play ball. And as there are thousands of regulations (many of which contradict other regulations) he is most likely “guilty” anyway so one would not even have to rig a trial (if he decided he was a hero).

    But it hardly matters – as the Ohio judgement (concerning ACORN) shows that the Supreme Court is already bowing to the march of history. Even before Comrade Obama is elected.

  • mr_ed

    I’m voting for Barry … Goldwater. The voice of the Silent Majority!

    This campaign cycle has made me sick. We Obamaphobes, we who see Sen. Obama within his incredibly disgusting and frightening context, needed a leader to take the fight to the other side.

    A fighter pilot, son of an admiral, grandson of an admiral … what happened to McCain’s warrior spirit? Did all of the compromise that’s the coin of legislative activity water it down? Did his POW experience strengthen his ability to “take it” but wilt his ability to “give it”? I just don’t understand.

    So I’m voting ABO. It’s a system of blood types, yes, but it also means Anyone But Obama.

  • I will be breaking with my perfect Libertarian voting record this year. It’s the Supreme Court that has me most worried. Obama simply cannot be trusted here. Not that McCain will do a great job, but he can at least maintain the status quo. I generally favor splitting the Republican vote as a way of announcing Libertarians as a voting block, but Obama’s caused me to lose my nerve.

  • I will be breaking with my perfect Libertarian voting record this year. It’s the Supreme Court that has me most worried. Obama simply cannot be trusted here. Not that McCain will do a great job, but he can at least maintain the status quo. I generally favor splitting the Republican vote as a way of announcing Libertarians as a voting block, but Obama’s caused me to lose my nerve.

  • Paul Marks

    “What happened to McCain’s warrior spirit?”

    He has been campaigning all over the place – with no help from us in the “free market movement”.

    On policy John McCain has some false ideas – such as McCain/Feingold.

    And some true ideas such as his opposition to wild spending and his support for entitlement program reform – a record the Cato Institute has long praised (even while Cato people, like the rest of us, gave McCain no help).

    John McCain presented a whole series of free market polices on cutting taxes, or getting government spending under control and on deregulation (for example allowing people to buy health cover over State lines).

    But he is not perfect, not pure – so we let him swing in the wind. Forgetting we would end up swinging next to him.

    Still (in our defence) the supreme mistake was his own – supporting the bailout.

    His long record of opposing bailouts and subsidies tossed aside.

    “But he wanted to oppose the bailout Paul”.

    Yes – but he gave in.

    He went along with the “free market” (phony free market of course) economists and other trash.

    Mitt Romneyism.

    But that does not excuse pro freedom people in the world (such as me) who could have helped John McCain and Sarah Palin beat the Communists – and did not do so.

  • RAB

    Ok I’m back and beginning to get genuinely scared by the idea of Obama winning tomorrow.
    I dont care if he is black or any other skin colour you care to name, from sun bed orange to zebra striped.

    What worries me is we now have the prospect of someone leading the Western world who is almost Damien from the Omen. Sorry to get spooky on you, especially coming from an atheist but…

    I know nothing about this guy I suddenly find. Nothing at all. Apart from he will say and do anything in the furtherance of his overweening ambition.
    All he has said so far is he is for Change. From what to what we have yet to find out.
    Those who even inadvertantly get in his way, like Joe the Plumber are targeted.
    This story here that CC picked up on.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/31/new-report-ohio-employee-was-ordered-to-snoop-on-joe-the-plumber/

    He reminds me of Michael Heseltine, but much more sinister.
    Heseltine had a list when he was still in college outlining when he would do what and when.
    I will be an MP by such a date, in the Cabinet by x time, Prime Minister by the year…
    Well fortunately that situation didn’t happen, but I fear this one might.
    Just imagine what might happen to you if you really got in his face!
    I learn that National Guards across America are being put on alert to quell the forseen rioting that will ensue if by some miracle Obama loses.
    The fact I and you know this already is intimidation of the first order.
    The message?
    Dont fuck with Obama or the world will end.

  • Sunfish

    I learn that National Guards across America are being put on alert to quell the forseen rioting that will ensue if by some miracle Obama loses.

    I hadn’t heard about the Guard.

    I HAVE heard that about local police. Actually, I’m normally off Sunday through Tuesday, but I’ve been called in for tomorrow. We’re not expecting noise here, but larger cities are nervous.

    Hell, one blog inhabited by Chicago police (The One’s (PBUH) home town) is in full panic mode now.

    BTW, SD readers: I would plan on having a crapload of extra food and batteries and stuff on hand Tuesday. And refresh yourself on your state laws concerning self-defense. In Colorado that’s CRS 18-1-704, 18-1-704.5, and 18-1-705.

    I’m not saying that your neighbors will riot. I’m just suggesting that there’s such a thing as ‘prudent’.

  • Dave

    The ignorance here is staggering. You look at Obama like he’s a threat… where do you get this information? His opponent? You people are afraid of nothing more than having a black man in office. Typical white supremacists. It sickens me. I thought society was past that.

  • nick g.

    Dave,
    I hope you’re not one of those stupid gits who thinks that any opponent should be killed for not automatically agreeing with you. You write like one.
    What are you doing on a Libertarian website? Here, you will find people who think that Government is the problem, NOT the solution. As an Australian, I can’t vote in American elections, but if the Republicans had been championed by Colin Powell, as seemed possible at one time, I’d have cheered him on. I am not a racist, AND I oppose bigger governments. The two ideas can go together!
    Mr. O., though, seems to promise more government. We are small-government types. Do you see the problem?

  • RAB

    Oh dear! Dave you really are a one brain celled troll arn’t you.
    Hold your thumb under the words as you read them (you know like your remedial teacher showed you) and have a dictionary to hand.
    This may not help much in your case, but is recommended.
    Now I am going to do this next bit in large type, just in case you are visually impared.

    IT IS NOT BECAUSE HE IS BLACK!

    It is because he is an egotist with whiles that make Tony Blair look like he wasn’t even trying to get elected for being all things to all men, all the fuckin time, forever, amen. Or until he finds something more lucrative .
    Obama wanted to run for Prez two months after he got elected to the Senate.
    Do you think, in the current climes, that the fucker will not get bored with the biggest job on the planet and find a way to get out of it if it all goes tits up(as it will) hoping to look like Tony Curtis’s suit in The Great Race?
    Leaving the rest of us with the proverbial custard pies in our faces.
    You will be the first to feel the slapstick sunshine.

  • RAB

    Oyez Oyez smite control.
    Well It’s been a while.
    I think it was the capital letters.
    Get it up as soon as you can control, because Dave dearly deserves the kick in the nuts I gave him.

  • nick g.

    RAB,
    It was MY turn to give him a kick in his rhetoric, and MY comment is also being approved by the Smite Gods!! Take your turn!

  • In that case, RAB and Nick G., I’ll have a go at it.

    I live in New York, and survived the Eliot Spitzer administration. Obama talks the same ‘change’ talk, but his bullying tactics are the same as what Spitzer used. Eliot Spitzer was a wicked monster — and I’m being polite when I say that.

    Or is Dave suggesting that I opposed Spitzer only because he’s black?

  • Since this is a polite libertarian blog comments section I will tell this Dave fellow that he can fuck right off for peddling his victimhood.

    America may elect McCain, maybe Obama- one way or the other racism has one hell of a lot less to do with it than what a lot of people think.

    And no matter who gets elected, they aren’t big enough to ruin this country. We’ll get over it eventually. We always do.

  • Johnathan Pearce

    Bear in mind that if Obama wins, the Daves of this world are going to use racism as a stick to beat off any criticisms of Obama, at least in his first few years in office. His skin colour is irrelevant. What goes inside that conceited head of his is not.

    Dave asks where we get our fears about Obama from. It comes from diligently going through his record, looking at the company he keeps, his voting record, his comments. It is all there if one cares to look for it. Dave clearly prefers to throw insults. Par for the course.

  • tdh

    Any bets on whether Obama will ever get prosecuted for knowingly opening his campaign up to millions of dollars in illegal contributions or for knowingly failing to report individual total contributions over the reporting threshold?

    Even if his collusion in the whitewash of impeached Bill Clinton weren’t an issue, I can’t conscionably vote for the McCain-Feingold kakagonist.

    Dave — Try the unsweetened Kool-Aid. It isn’t quite as harmful, and might keep one or two of the delusions away.

  • M

    McCain ceded too many issues. He backed bailing out the scumbags on Wall Street. He co-wrote a failed bill to give amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, so couldn’t use the issue to appeal to white working-class folk who are against mass immigration. And despite his pathetic pandering to Hispanics, Hispanics are mostly going to vote for Obama. And he won’t attack Obama over his associations with Reverend Wright, despite the fact that Obama’s links to Wright are a lot stronger than Obama’s links to Bill Ayers. And although being strongly pro-Iraq war is what probably made McCain the GOP nominee, I don’t think it has helped McCain in appealling to the wider electorate when the majority of Americans tired of the Iraq war long ago and George W Bush is even more unpopular than Richard Nixon ever was.

    The problem is that the things McCain really cares about, like Invading the World and Inviting the World, are death on the campaign trail in 2008.

    The Republicans’ winning issue this year could have been mass immigration, both illegal and legal. But they somehow wound up with the author of the 2006 McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill as their candidate!

    - Steve Sailer

  • Eric

    McCain thought the right strategy would be to run just to the right of Obama – that way the people in the “middle” would vote for him.

    But the undecideds aren’t really in the middle politically. They’re just people who don’t think much about politics. They’ll go for Obama because he has a lot of charisma.

    I think McCain did as well as could be expected, given the hill he had to climb – a hostile press, an unpopular incumbent of the same party, and an opponent who oozes charisma while lying through his teeth. McCain would have beaten Kerry in a landslide.

  • The Wobbly Guy

    I respect Sailer’s analysis, but I disagree with him and the people at VDare. Immigration, while important, is probably not within the top three priorities on the minds of the electorate, which are taxes, security, and the war.

    Going massively anti-immigration would have invited much worse media attacks. Because of the pervading political correctness that has enveloped all discourse in the US, it would have been suicide for the GOP.

  • Paul Marks

    Dave – “where did you get your information on Obama from, his opponent?”

    Sadly no – John McCain never really took the lead in the fight to expose Comrade Barack, that is why McCain lost.

    Most voters are lazy, they will not do their own research – they are led by the nose by the media, like you are Dave. So if a Republican candidate will not take the lead (for many months in advance) attacking his opponent he will lost – the media and so on will see to that.

    “Most multi million Dollar corporations do not pay tax’”

    Multi million Dollar turnover or multimillion Dollar profit?

    Most likely you do not know the difference.

    Sadly many corporate managers do not know either.

    They are the products of the university system, who could not care less about shareowners. And thanks to government taxes (such as Capital Gains Tax) and regulations, corporate managers are “protected” from individual shareowners – right till the corporation goes bankrupt and, these days, even beyond that.