Talk about theatre — Tuesday’s slugfest between MittMan and the Dean of Duplicity had all the drama of the Thrilla in Manila. A couple of times, when Romney and Obama got in each other’s face, it appeared as though they might even come to blows.
But, then, one has to remind oneself that, as entertaining as this stuff may be, none of it is real. Anyone who listened carefully to what was being said would recognize that, theatrics aside, most of the debate was about the most efficient way to redistribute income and wealth.
To the best of my knowledge, neither candidate so much as mentioned the words liberty, freedom, or Constitution — which should be the main focus of every debate. That’s right, the biggest problem we have is that we are being robbed of our liberty/freedom and that the document that is supposed to protect us from an oppressive government has been trashed.
Nor did Romney ever attempt to make a defense of capitalism on moral grounds, an absolutely essential undertaking if angry, free-stuff folks are to be rehabilitated after the inevitable collapse of the welfare state.
Romney pretty much summed up where he stands ideologically by making it clear that under his presidency, the top 5 percent of income earners would continue to pay 60 percent of all taxes. It was enough to make one fantasize about a true freedom candidate being on the same stage with him and asking, “Who has the moral authority to decide that the most successful among us have a moral obligation to support those who are less successful? Is that in the Constitution?”
Oh, and one other thing. Mitt also managed to get in one of those “He’s a nice guy” moments when he said that “The president has tried, but his policies haven’t worked.” Wrong, Mitt; they have worked.
In that vein, my fantasy freedom candidate might have said, “I have to admit that Barack Obama’s policies for fundamentally transforming the United States of America into a collectivist utopia (or hell) have worked almost to perfection, and if he gets reelected, he will surely finish the job.”
So, while the theatrics of this debate were excellent, the one thing that has not changed since I was a kid is that, through gradualism, America keeps moving inexorably toward collectivism. Actually, I take that back. In Obama, the far left has someone who has been brazen enough to try to finish the job quickly. And if he is reelected, he will do just that.
But with a President Romney, it will be back to gradualism, with one catch: Economic reality will force him to move to the left far more rapidly than any Republican president before him until, in the words of Margaret Thatcher, the government runs out of other people’s money.
You have permission to reprint this article so long as you place the following wording at the end of the article:
Copyright © 2018 Robert Ringer
ROBERT RINGER is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.
To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.
Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints. Make your case passionately, but please keep your comments civil and to the point (maximum of 1500 characters). Obscene, profane, abusive, or off-topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked.
If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion. Thanks for your participation.