I have heard it said numerous times in the past month alone, by Christians nonetheless, that the important thing about the next election is “getting rid of Obama.” Such sentiment, to me, is relatively nonsensical. What good is it to get rid of someone from public office if the replacement is just the same or worse?
In the field of Republican candidates sans Ron Paul, you essentially have a bunch of ideologically identical bozos. On all the issues that matter, they are essentially the same (or worse) than Obama himself. Take health care, for instance. Can any candidate, other than Paul, offer one piece of substantial evidence that they do not want to replace Obamacare with some form of Republicare? As the wise sage Yoda once said, “Size matters not.” Republicare may be a smaller version of Obamacare in the details, but never forget that in principle there is no difference.
The candidate’s positions on health care should be proof-positive that none of them care about the free market. Only Ron Paul has consistently defended the free market and demands that the federal government stop interfering in health care and otherwise. But there is more to the story.
Regarding taxation, the candidates (sans Paul again) completely miss the point. Of course they all want to cut taxes, this is the bread and butter of Republican rhetoric (other than pro-life language). But taxation itself is not the only variable in the equation. In fact, it doesn’t matter if you cut taxes without cutting spending, because any deficit incurred by the government is simply delayed taxation.
All candidates (sans Paul) advocate essentially the same kind of spending spree that Obama has been on the past three years, and Bush II for the previous eight. For what it’s worth, Barack Obama is essentially the continuation and logical conclusion of George W. Bush, and the current candidates (sans Paul) are in their essence the continuation and logical conclusion of Obama. Again, only Ron Paul has provided a plan to substantially reduce the actual size and scope of government power and to substantially reduce taxes in tandem.
So on these key issues, Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich are no different than Obama, and Paul is left standing. Why, then, do conservatives, and especially “conservative” Christians, avoid Ron Paul?
It probably has to do with their devotion to war. In that case, however, the conservative case against Obama must be abandoned. Every ounce of Obama’s dubious anti-war leanings touted during his campaign has been completely ripped to shreds, yet we still hear that Obama is “anti-military” for some reason. Christian warmongers should be proud of Obama.
Interestingly enough, if you want to see who troops support you should once again look to Ron Paul. Just as in 2008, military donors prefer Ron Paul over other candidates. Their second choice, interestingly enough, is Obama. What does the right – especially the Christian right – think that means?
Furthermore, I continue to be amazed at how much the right says they care about spending, yet turn a blind eye to the trillion dollar Iraq War and repeatedly call for military action against Iran. Which pocketbook do they care about?
On every issue of spending, the other three candidates are fundamentally and ideologically no different than Obama. Yet they still hate Obama.
On every issue of defense, the other three candidates are fundamentally and ideologically no different than Obama. Yet they still hate Obama.
On every issue of spending and defense that supposedly matter to Republicans, only Paul can lay claim to a realistic solution. On every issue that matters*, Ron Paul has been right and the other candidates wrong. Again, how can anyone claim a dime’s worth of difference between Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, and Obama? It certainly isn’t enough to write home about.
Yet “conservatives” and Christians still flock to crooks, liars, and at least one pathological adulterer. Why is this?
Wanting to get rid of Obama is fine, but don’t kid yourself. When you love war more than liberty, you will make crooked compromises. When you begin to truly appreciate what liberty means, I think you will find more than just your views on the free market changing.
This post was inspired in part by Anthony Gregory’s piece regarding the left on the LewRockwell.com Blog.
* One caveat: immigration. I am not 100% on board with Paul’s views on immigration, but they are still much better than anyone else in the field.