Reason Magazine - Hit & Run - Wayne Root, former Libertarian Party Vice Presidential Candidate and Current Member of the LP's National Committee: "It's Gotta Be Romney, There is No Choice" http://m.reason.com/26821/show/e9e2a9ec0a05851bc2ee66ad7cae1d52/ .....”I think the important thing now is to make sure Obama is not elected,and that means in my mind, I would love for a libertarian like Gary Johnson the two term governor of New Mexico would actually get elected President, but I think we all know that’s not going to happen so therefore it’s got to be Romney there is no choice.”.... RRD:Let me clear this up for Mr.Root:I am not voting for
Mitt Romney. You see how easy that is!
There is a choice!
I sometimes wonder if people say "I don't have a choice"...to evade the fact that they do,in fact,have a choice,and that they may be making the wrong one?
After all,if you don't have a choice,not only are you not responsible for what you do,("no one can blame me"..."I couldn't help it!),but you don't need to even explain your position.
I,by contrast believe that I have a choice,and I take full responsibility for my choices. And my choice is to jump off this runaway suicide train,even as I am being told that I only have a choice of poisons. And as to the statement:"the important thing now is to make sure Obama is not elected",why? Obama is after all a "nice guy,he's just in over his head",just ask Romney.
Obama is not a socialist,just ask Romney.
Obamacare can't be socialism,it is modeled on Romneycare,and Romney after all said that the Individual Mandate is "conservative".
People seem to forget that you do not vote "against" people,you vote for them.
If you vote for Romney you will be partially responsible for what he does.
I do not accept the claim that not voting is not a moral option.
Nor do I accept the,argument that it is better to have a "empty suit",like Romney,than Obama.
It's true that Romney is devoid of principle,but as has been made abundantly clear,he is not simply going to do whatever is popular,if he was going to,he would be opposing the Individual Mandate,rather than trying to persuade people of its ”Conservatism”.He would not embrace a position to the LEFT of the general public on Global Warming and the Individual Mandate.
Some are suprised by this.
Why?
Didn't you read The Fountainhead?
Romney does not want the approval of the voters in general,or of the Tea Party,or of the base. He wants the approval of the "inside-the-beltway" types.
Do you think that Romney will be controlled by Conservatives?
Did Wynand control the Banner? In a contest between Wynand and Toohey,Wynand didn't have a chance in hell,he simply created the architecture for Toohey to move in.Romney will follow the MSM to his;and our,destruction,all the while thinking that he is clever.
If he wins he will tell himself that it was because of the independents,and that the base will always be there,no matter what he does,so why should he care what the base says.
And why shouldn't he believe that?
Who will the Democrats start nominating?
Would Hillary Clinton be acceptable?
Could we ”let” her win?
"But Robert we have to beat Obama,Obama's different"...
You mean that he's not like John Kerry?
Kerry spoke of people he knew ,who came out of reeducation camps as better people.
Please don't tell me that it's "just Obama",Obama is not unique,he is a mainstream Liberal Democrat,they have people of exactly the same soul as this man lined up around the block to take his place. The main difference between Obama and Romney is that Romney--as a Republican--will be able to make the case for the Individual Mandate more effectively than a man who literally was a Saul Alinsky trained community organizer. Very few people fail to grasp that Obama is a Liberal. Obama has been so blatant,his poisonous ideas are practically marked with a skull and bones.Romney's poison is more dangerous not because it is more lethal,but because it is sugar-coated,and thus more insidious,& more likely to be accepted.
It is in that sense that he is more dangerous than Obama,on Socialized Medicine & Global Warming.
A similiar point was made by Dr.Lewis: “Obama's Atomic Bomb: The Ideological Clarity of the Democratic Agenda” by John David Lewis
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2009-fall/obamas-atomic-bomb.asp We are engaged in a moral & philosophical struggle,not a purely political one.And choosing Romney means choosing to undercut our own credibility,and means appointing as leader of the Republican Party,the man who enacted Obamacare's prototype.Romneycare is a object lesson in the self-defeating nature of pragmatism.
It is not a exagerration to say that Romneycare was conceived as a way of "beating the Democrats at their own game".
That strategy has been shown to be suicidal.
But many,including Romney,have learned nothing from it.
You may be sowing the seeds of your destruction with the "practical" things that you do today.
I could easily envision a scenario where,using the same rationale as was used for Romneycare,Romney passes a "smarter" Cap and Trade bill,since such a plan is "inevitable".
Mitt Romney. You see how easy that is!
There is a choice!
I sometimes wonder if people say "I don't have a choice"...to evade the fact that they do,in fact,have a choice,and that they may be making the wrong one?
After all,if you don't have a choice,not only are you not responsible for what you do,("no one can blame me"..."I couldn't help it!),but you don't need to even explain your position.
I,by contrast believe that I have a choice,and I take full responsibility for my choices. And my choice is to jump off this runaway suicide train,even as I am being told that I only have a choice of poisons. And as to the statement:"the important thing now is to make sure Obama is not elected",why? Obama is after all a "nice guy,he's just in over his head",just ask Romney.
Obama is not a socialist,just ask Romney.
Obamacare can't be socialism,it is modeled on Romneycare,and Romney after all said that the Individual Mandate is "conservative".
People seem to forget that you do not vote "against" people,you vote for them.
If you vote for Romney you will be partially responsible for what he does.
I do not accept the claim that not voting is not a moral option.
Nor do I accept the,argument that it is better to have a "empty suit",like Romney,than Obama.
It's true that Romney is devoid of principle,but as has been made abundantly clear,he is not simply going to do whatever is popular,if he was going to,he would be opposing the Individual Mandate,rather than trying to persuade people of its ”Conservatism”.He would not embrace a position to the LEFT of the general public on Global Warming and the Individual Mandate.
Some are suprised by this.
Why?
Didn't you read The Fountainhead?
Romney does not want the approval of the voters in general,or of the Tea Party,or of the base. He wants the approval of the "inside-the-beltway" types.
Do you think that Romney will be controlled by Conservatives?
Did Wynand control the Banner? In a contest between Wynand and Toohey,Wynand didn't have a chance in hell,he simply created the architecture for Toohey to move in.Romney will follow the MSM to his;and our,destruction,all the while thinking that he is clever.
If he wins he will tell himself that it was because of the independents,and that the base will always be there,no matter what he does,so why should he care what the base says.
And why shouldn't he believe that?
Who will the Democrats start nominating?
Would Hillary Clinton be acceptable?
Could we ”let” her win?
"But Robert we have to beat Obama,Obama's different"...
You mean that he's not like John Kerry?
Kerry spoke of people he knew ,who came out of reeducation camps as better people.
Please don't tell me that it's "just Obama",Obama is not unique,he is a mainstream Liberal Democrat,they have people of exactly the same soul as this man lined up around the block to take his place. The main difference between Obama and Romney is that Romney--as a Republican--will be able to make the case for the Individual Mandate more effectively than a man who literally was a Saul Alinsky trained community organizer. Very few people fail to grasp that Obama is a Liberal. Obama has been so blatant,his poisonous ideas are practically marked with a skull and bones.Romney's poison is more dangerous not because it is more lethal,but because it is sugar-coated,and thus more insidious,& more likely to be accepted.
It is in that sense that he is more dangerous than Obama,on Socialized Medicine & Global Warming.
A similiar point was made by Dr.Lewis: “Obama's Atomic Bomb: The Ideological Clarity of the Democratic Agenda” by John David Lewis
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2009-fall/obamas-atomic-bomb.asp We are engaged in a moral & philosophical struggle,not a purely political one.And choosing Romney means choosing to undercut our own credibility,and means appointing as leader of the Republican Party,the man who enacted Obamacare's prototype.Romneycare is a object lesson in the self-defeating nature of pragmatism.
It is not a exagerration to say that Romneycare was conceived as a way of "beating the Democrats at their own game".
That strategy has been shown to be suicidal.
But many,including Romney,have learned nothing from it.
You may be sowing the seeds of your destruction with the "practical" things that you do today.
I could easily envision a scenario where,using the same rationale as was used for Romneycare,Romney passes a "smarter" Cap and Trade bill,since such a plan is "inevitable".
No comments:
Post a Comment