Decoding the first Presidential Debate of 2012 for the undecided voter

 

I certainly hope that you watched the entire first Presidential Debate on the economy, if you didn’t you should watch it now.  Almost immediately after the debate, the pundits were weighing in and spinning the debate in the direction they leaned.  I don’t care what on-line polls say, or what hacks like James Carville or Michael Moore think.  Even though most pollsters and  commentators say Romney won the debate, that’s not what’s important either.  Most folks watch these debates hoping for memorable zingers and one-liners from their favorite candidate.  That’s okay, but that isn’t why debates are important.  Debates matter because they are one of the only opportunities for the few undecided voters to hear directly from the candidates.  This election will be decided by the turnout of the 50% of the population that actually vote, of which 94% already have their mind made up so about 6% of them are undecided and they will choose the next President.  Mitt Romany famously said as much in the “scandalous” undercover video recorded a couple weeks ago. He was correct.  Most Americans aren’t very politically savvy, they vote the way their more politically involved friends and family tell them to.  Period.  There are a few however that will watch and listen to the candidates make their case in their own words before making up their minds.  That’s a wonderful thing, that’s how democracy is supposed to work.  Here is the problem, the candidates are generally dealing in specific details at this time in a race.  That’s okay for the aforementioned politically savvy folks, but the undecided voters need to hear bottom line philosophical arguments.  That’s what Jim Lehrer attempted to do when he asked “What do each if you think the role of government should be?”.  That’s where both candidates let me down.  Both Obama and Romney gave generic party line responses on the economy that included some specific differences, but they missed the point.  The American people need to know what is at the core of each candidates economic belief structure.  Since they didn't do it, I will attempt to explain it.  Once you learn to decode it, its relatively simple.

 

 

 

Obama and the Democrats believe in something called Collectivism.  We have given this philosophy a moniker in American politics, we call it Progressivism which in reality is synonymous with Socialism.  It essentially boils down to this: The Democrats subscribe to Progressivism, Collectivism, and Socialism.  Generally speaking, they believe that the government should act on behalf of the people to ensure equality of wealth and resources.  To accomplish this the wealth must be filtered through the government which has the power and then redistributed to the people.  For this to occur the government must control the flow of commerce and production.  This is why Obama wants to tax the rich.  Unfortunately, you cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. You can find Collectivist philosophy applied in the Socialist Democracies of Europe and in the Communist Societies of Russia, Cuba and China today. When Obama said  “I want to spread the wealth around”, “I actually believe in redistribution”, and “everyone needs to pay their fair share” or “I want everyone to get their fair share” this is what he is referring to.  Common sense tells you that what one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. We know where implementing this philosophy will take us.  Look at the economies of Greece, Spain, and Portugal, those nations could not multiply wealth by dividing it and eventually could no longer afford their entitlement programs and their economies have collapsed.  The government cannot give something to someone without first taking it from someone else first. The “entitlement” programs of the “welfare state” we have created in our country are unsustainable, and they are already causing a severe economic recession. We simply can’t afford it, you see, we will soon run out of rich people to tax.  You also eventually run out of people willing to work once half of the people realize that they do not have to work because the other half will work for them.  Currently 47% of our citizens receive government assistance, soon everyone may stop producing. The further the United States “Progresses” toward Socialism, the more inevitable an economic collapse becomes. Our 16 Trillion is debt is already greater than the debt of all the Eurozone countries combined.

 

 

Romney and the Republicans believe in Individualism.  We commonly refer to this as Capitalism and Conservatism. That is, the belief that the government’s power is derived from the consent of the governed, and it only exists to protect our freedoms and individual liberty.  Basically the ideals outlined in the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence.  In order for this system to work, the individual must have sovereignty, private property rights, and actively participate in free market capitalism. You can look into the history of the United States over the past 236 years and see this doctrine applied.  The individual is allowed to gain wealth, create enterprises, and has broad freedom to make choices.  In this system there will be great winners who create businesses, and generate great wealth.  There will inevitably be those that lack the capacity or motivation to achieve and therefore obtain very little.  For free market capitalism (Individualism) to work it requires a large amount of independence, initiative, and self-responsibility.  There is risk and responsibility, but there is much greater opportunity, some will lose, but there will be more winners than losers and the winners can win big.  These ideals are documented in our Declaration of Independence and in our Constitution.  We also know where philosophy will take us, it is why the United States developed into the most powerful and successful nation in the history of the world.  In order for the United States to recover from our current recession, all we have to do is reign in our government and force them to adhere to the rules outlined in our constitution.

 

 

In summary, the Romney and the Republicans offer you the unequal but limitless prospect for wealth and opportunity, the Democrats and Obama offer the even distribution of whatever they choose to give you. Obama and the Democrats promise to give you their interpretation of fairness for all, as long you are willing to surrender your liberty in exchange for the guarantee that none of your neighbors will get more than you.  Mitt Romney and the Republicans can only offer limitless opportunity for you to succeed or fail.  The question you must ask yourself is: Do I trust the government more, or do I trust myself?  Here is the bottom line, if you want more from your government you will have to give up your liberty for it, if you want more liberty and opportunity, you must limit your government. The bottom line: Obama is for a more powerful government, and diminished individual liberty.  Romney is for a more limited government and increased individual liberty. In the United States of America the people still have the power (for now) and we determine the direction we want our country to go.  That is why this election is so vitally important.  We are very close to the point of no return.  I know Mitt Romney doesn’t have all the answers and I don’t have any delusions that he can save us by simply winning the election.  Nonetheless, I believe in America and in what made us the greatest country in the history of the world, our Constitution.  I will vote for Mitt Romney because he has promised a return to our founding principles.  If you care about America, and want to leave a free country for your children and grandchildren you will vote for Mitt Romney