I enjoyed Mike Godwin's piece on Reason.com on why libertarians should consider voting for Barack Obama, but I didn't find the arguments compelling.
It's not that I've totally written off the idea of voting for the O-man. In fact, I would instantly switch from my vote for Gary Johnson if l heard the president say:
"You know folks, I've been thinking it over and it's not right that I casually joke about my drug use while ramping up prosecution on California medical marijuana, as well as all drug users. This was a bad policy to begin with, and the damage it does to young people who behave the same way I did was a mistake. That's why I am ending the war on drugs right now."
Or:
"It's been said that circumstances of history choose what a president's legacy will be. If I am granted another four years in office I will do everything within my power to be known as the Free Trade President, and have begun phasing-out all tariffs, including sugar, solar panels and tires. This will save American consumers needed money and allow our economy to prosper."
Or how about:
"As many of my liberty-focused critics have said, my administration supports killing suspected terrorists with drone strikes, even if they are American citizens overseas. This is a very complex issue and I regret moving ahead without first having a conversation with the American people. We're going to begin that dialogue right now."
Or even:
"It's well known that my economic policies have failed to rescue the economy like I said they would in 2008. Rather than blame others, I have decided to take responsibility and expand my knowledge of macroeconomics with the aid of my new advisers Gary Becker, Greg Mankiw, Tyler Cowen, Mike Munger and Russ Roberts. I haven't switched teams, but I am more open to opposing ideas."
Not likely. But what about:
"Is it just me, or does Alan Grayson remind anyone else of a smug manatee?"
If any of those lines come out of his mouth I'll be on the front lines chanting "Four More Years!"
Friday, November 2, 2012
I would vote for Obama if...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So, with all due respect, it is clear that you will not be voting for the O-man, sir. As we all know full well, that it does not behoove the Commander in Chief to make flagrant, "baring your soul naked" concessions (such as the ones referenced above) at this point in time. In all sincerity, you would not need to generate the screenplay for such utopian confessions if this great country of ours would institute solid term limits for all political offices at the federal and state levels. Far be it from me to stand on my soap box and holler like a zealot...oh, but I'm gonna. If we enacted unwavering term limits, then our President and other elected officials/legislators would be challenged to spend more time on problem solving (and perhaps, character building...eegads!)and less time springboarding from inauguration speeches to "get me re-elected" speeches. Best we sit back and cogitate on that for a few...
ReplyDeleteWe already have presidential term limits, of course. I was enthusiastically in favor of term limits in college because they limited incumbency advantages, but have since learned of the corruption problems they create by giving politicians nothing to lose while in office.
ReplyDeleteI read that article as well. I'm surprised you say you enjoyed it. I thought the health care argument wasn't libertarian at all. The immigration, gay marriage, and abortion portions were good libertarian cases.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious what you thought about his Obamacare argument.
I thought it was, as you said, unlibertarian and missed the mark. The idea that freedom is having the government solve ones problems so the individual doesn't havw to worry about then is far from libertarian, and the author clearly recognized that.
ReplyDelete