June 7, 2008
Why I can't vote Democrat
In the nation's most anticipated concession speech of the modern age, Hillary Clinton finally endorsed her opponent in the primary race. In doing so, she exposed exactly why Democrats are, as a group, the enemy of America's heritage of individualism and liberty:
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are rights that belong to each of us as individuals," she said. "But our lives, our freedom, our happiness, are best enjoyed, best protected, and best advanced when we do work together."
Whoa there, madam. Says who?
Certainly there are situations where we benefit from the assistance of others to safeguard our lives or defend our freedom. And happiness is always greater when shared with someone you love. But the work Miss Hillary wants to do in the cause of "advancing" our lives, our freedom, our happiness will, without exception, interfere with MY life, MY freedom and MY happiness.
"We all want an economy that sustains the American Dream, the opportunity to work hard and have that work rewarded, to save for college, a home and retirement, to afford that gas and those groceries and still have a little left over at the end of the month. An economy that lifts all of our people and ensures that our prosperity is broadly distributed and shared."
Let's dwell for a moment... Ensures that OUR prosperity is ... broadly distributed... and ... shared. Hmmm, sounds vaguely familar.
But the obvious question is, if prosperity is shared then how is hard work rewarded? (Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, choosing and deciding from whom to who else and by how much.)
And now that Hillary has bowed out (for now at least) the 'man behind the curtain' in-waiting is Senator Obama:
"That is what we will do now as we join forces with Senator Obama and his campaign. We will make history together as we write the next chapter in America's story. We will stand united for the values we hold dear, for the vision of progress we share, and for the country we love. There is nothing more American than that."
And there is the reason I could never vote for a modern Democrat: The mere idea of equating Americanism with Egalitarianism is offensive to its core.
My, and The Founders' ideal of Americanism is more like this: 'The American' magazine
2008 Race Posted by JohnGalt at June 7, 2008 5:20 PM
Indeed -- and well said.
As my magazine (and blog reading) tastes have drifted a little more toward the libertarian, I remain shocked that liberty lovers cannot express a preference for Republicans. They have their faults and an incredible capacity to disappoint, but I find their core principles far more conducive to liberty.
(I recognize that you did not endorse the GOP in your post.) Little-l libs favor Republicans at the voting booth 75-25. Yet they all find it difficult to express aloud.
Posted by: jk at June 8, 2008 11:26 AMAnd as I contemplate bumper sticker ideas for the coming season a circled donkey with a line through it has more appeal than an elephant. And I am a registered Republican, mind you.
Republicanism has done much to damage its "brand" as they say. Not just the profligate spending to keep up with the Democrat Joneses, but the bald-faced hypocrisy of opposing any and every abortion - even morning after pills or in cases of rape or incest - while at the same time claiming to be the party of individual liberty. They argue that the unborn has a right to life just as valid as the mother's, because without life nothing else matters. I argue that while human life does begin at conception, the mother's self-reliant life and liberty trump the unborn's in the closest of all of life's close calls; because as abominable as any abortion is, the prospect of 'the state' making these decisions for individual women is even worse.
I engaged this debate respectfully with two bright young fellow delegates at last week's state GOP convention. I think I did give them some small glimmer of a reason to rethink their positions.
Posted by: johngalt at June 8, 2008 12:21 PM | What do you think? [2]