RichmondLiberty.org

by Robert Russo

Two years from now the nation will have changed again, the situation in Iraq may be different, the political stakes will be different. Will we see a Libertarian front-runner? If the debates and other media are still not open to us, which candidate will claim the vote of liberals? (or conservatives who want to see things changed back to pre-Bush) Everyone wants change, so much that the news agencies are already going hoopla over even the suggestion of who the liberal contenders will be. It will be interesting to look back on this premature mayhem and see if anything became of it.

This week CNN begins its 5-part series "Broken Government" exploring how much of the system is broken "beyond repair" (currently 94% of those polled agree our government is broken).* What president has ever investigated this himself? We libertarians have known this for years because we hold the solutions to what is irreparable (get rid of it).

Last week former Gov. Mark Warner declared he will not run, and now Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois makes headlines for merely considering the possibility on NBC’s "Meet the Press".** Obama owes his brief presence on the national scene to a single speech he made as keynote speaker at the Democratic Convention two years ago, which earned him rave reviews and instant popularity because (in my opinion) he is young, Black and a powerful speaker. For I was watching this speech and it was one of the worst I have ever heard, the reason being that it was a textbook political pacifier, easy to write and guaranteed to please, without a single original statement we have not heard before.

He is greatly admired and I am not saying he isn’t a dynamic and qualified representative or even a liberal (probably more so than most), there is simply nothing he has said that I have heard which suggests he is a liberal. He spoke at length about his family and origins, a qualifier for the approval of conservatives going back thousands of years. He did speak briefly about helping workers arise from low wages, helping people pay for college and fighting racism, all issues that were around when his grandfather and likely great-grandfather were his age. It is true that he was promoting John Kerry and not himself, but he is a maintainer, a custodian like most on the political scene. As he said, "we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation".

This statement sounds like things are going pretty well. I don’t care what a candidate’s family background is, unless I want people to judge me by mine. I don’t want one fighting the same issues my grandparents did, each generation is supposed to have its own advent. The difference between Martin Luther King and speakers today is that he was a revolutionary. If there is no suggestion of change then there is no promise of hope. So Obama brings nothing new to the political arena except himself, and by definition that is not a liberal or neo-conservative.

One could say that an African candidate is naturally a liberal, but race should not be entered in with one's political evaluation. Hillary Clinton appeals to pre-Bush conservatives but it remains to be seen where the nation will stand on having a female president, or becoming president by being the wife of a president. Mark Warner is a liberal businessman, but none of these are the true liberal we want in a president (or conservative depending on your point of view). The nation calls out for a Libertarian without knowing it.

*http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/broken.government/index.html
**http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/22/obama.presidency/index.html
***http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19751-2004Jul27.html

Question of the Week: Do you believe we as libertarians must only vote for members of our own party, or is there something to be gained by engaging in the two-party system and backing a Rep or Dem who has some agreeable qualities? Please send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input.