Liber-T-Party Stump Speech
Fellow citizens of this Congressional district, I come before you today to apply for a job. I may not be the guy you are looking for; but I have some unconventional ideas about it to share with you, which you should find thought provoking at the least. Thanks for giving me your time and attention. Please bear with me. I am not a charismatic orator out of central casting for politicians. I am just a local businessman and neighbor, who is an avid reader, thinker, writer, and an unapologetic Patriot of the noblest experiment in self-government ever to grace this planet.
 •• ∞ ••
 I seek not to be your leader; you don’ t need a leader. You need a loyal employee; and I offer only to be your humble Representative in Congress. I have no grand vision of a glorious future to sell to you; frankly the future looks anything but rosy. The job I seek, is to faithfully represent the predominant views of the citizens of this district in Congress, not just mine; so long as doing so, would not cause me to violate our Constitution, which I will swear a solemn vow to protect, defend and uphold. Certainly not those of a partisan caucus, and ever independently, of any so-called ‘leadership’ clique on Capital Hill.
 •• ∞ ••
 I am not here to pander to you. I couldn’t do so, even if I wanted to. Washington is beyond broke, and pandering politicians buying votes, have already mortgaged the future of our posterity to the hilt. If this nation somehow survives the looming economic meltdown, our grandchildren’s grandchildren will still be paying dearly for those votes. Investments in our future, some claim? Look around; what pray tell besides the unconscionable national debt, will our generation bequeath to theirs? If you are looking for a pork daddy, I am not your man.
 •• ∞ ••
 Neither am I here to insult your intelligence with demagoguery. While as nervous for our future as you are, I won’t ascribe evil motives to others, to frighten you into voting for me. Americans, when awake, can see right through such propaganda. It only takes a few thoughtful moments of reflection, to realize that in the raging culture war, which regrettably somehow dominates our political discourse nowadays, most of us are hunkered down on defense. With the exception of a small minority, consisting of Marxist inspired Politically Correct activists on the Left, and clergy inspired Piously Correct activists on the Right, the rest of us are not trying to impose our own social mores on our neighbors.
For the most part, Americans are rather tolerant of benign nonconformists. They wish only to be left alone themselves, to live our own lives in our own way, unmolested by PC busybodies bent on coercion, who would empower well-armed government agents if necessary, to enforce conformity with their worldview. By the time the General election rolls around in November, few of us are left with an ideal viable candidate or platform. Most of us cast a negative ballot, not for the agenda of our candidate, but against the one with an agenda we like even less, or fear more, as the case may be.
We need to acknowledge that most of our neighbors use this selfsame process. Their vote for the other candidate, shouldn’t imply that they are evil, stupid, or enthusiastically support his agenda either; they were just voting against the agenda espoused by ours, and very likely in a similar lesser-of-two-evils subjective decision. Far too often, the deciding factor is a candidate’s position on a hot-button cultural issue, which isn’t even within the purview of the office in question.
While it well serves the corrupt demagogues, to keep us at each other’s throats rather than their own, we seriously err in misjudging our neighbors’ motives, and presuming the worst. Noncombatants, caught in the middle between the dogmatic culture warriors, often have more in common with each other, than with either of them; even if impelled to pick opposite sides, in the unwelcome strife over mundane issues, which most of us don’t even find very compelling. Most would gladly give up fretting over the lifestyle, of faceless citizens thousands of miles away, if they would just agree to butt out of ours.
Reasonable folks can disagree, without being disagreeable. Most of us have close friends or family, compatible in most every other way, who disagree over some burning issue or another, so we know how. There are as yet insufficient viable candidates, championing our preference for Constitutionally limited government, which defends our individual Liberty from the intolerant culture warriors. We need to abandon the divisive Left/Right paradigm, which dissuades increasingly militant moderates, from abandoning the PC activists, meeting in the middle, and collaborating to recruit more.
 •• ∞ ••
 I fully appreciate that this job is thankless in these turbulent times, and you likely question why a rational man would even want it. I assure you that I seek neither fame, fortune, nor power; but desire only to offer my humble services, out of sheer old-fashioned patriotism, in the spirit of duty. I wish to repay my country for defending my Liberty to lead a rather fulfilling life, and do my small part endeavoring to perpetuate that Liberty, for our posterity.
Neither do I seek a political career. My entrepreneurial career suits me just fine, thank you; and when the single two-year term expires, I would much appreciate being relieved of the duty. Then, content that I had given it my best effort, I can return to my fulsome life here among you, living without privilege, under the effects of any laws I may have helped to enact. I can assure you that this eventuality, would be a weighty factor when deliberating on bills, as a citizen legislator on your behalf.
Frankly, however, I would be more interested in repealing unnecessary existing laws, rules, and onerous regulations, than passing new ones. Our Federal government is in need of serious reform, including a substantial haircut. I anticipate being far too busy actively engaged in that daunting task, to waste half of my time shoveling pork, attending fundraisers, and perpetually running for re-election.
Our Representatives are our employees, and we pay them rather well. Shouldn’t they earn their salaries spending their time diligently focused on our affairs, instead of their career goals? If they have time for endless campaigning, perhaps they should spend more of it reading bills before voting on them. Which reminds me; If not permitted enough time to read a bill in its entirety, or unable to comprehend it when I do, I won’t vote to pass it. Fair enough?
I would work to reduce the size and scope of government, not grow it. I intend to be a force for trimming and eliminating bureaucracies, not conjuring up reasons to expand them, or form new ones. My natural inclination would always be, to balance the budget by cutting spending, not by raising taxes. The productive taxpayers in this country, are more than Taxed Enough Already. So, any mischief this next Congress does manage to make, wouldn’t be for lack of my sincere efforts to prevent it.
 •• ∞ ••
 Here is an interesting challenge to conventional wisdom for you. You would need to get used to the sight of me with my finger in the wind. That’s right; I intend to listen to you, and do my best to follow your lead. I never quite understood the nearly universal condemnation, of members of Congress as somehow unprincipled, for carefully consulting the polls, and only casting votes that are popular with their constituents, when contrary to Party orthodoxy.
Excuse me; but isn’t that precisely what Representatives are hired by their constituents to do? Do they really deserve derisive labels like ‘RHINO’ or ‘Blue Dog’; when they should instead be lauded as ‘Faithful Representatives?’ Whence came this odd notion that we should elect visionaries, and anoint them as our ‘leaders,’ rather than hire Representatives committed to faithfully doing our bidding in Congress? You can count on me to be your Faithful Representative; Party Whips and juvenile name-calling taunts notwithstanding. My loyalty will always be to this district, not a Party or its platform.
 •• ∞ ••
 I offer you yet another promise. I will never deliberately lie to you. You can rest assured that if I say something, it is the unvarnished truth as I understand it. In return, I am going to ask for your indulgence, with a little slack for occasionally telling you a truth, which you may not have wanted to hear. Too often, we encourage our politicians to lie to us, by rewarding the smooth talkers, who tell us easy lies we wish to hear, and condemning courageous straight talkers, expressing hard cold truths that we don’t. I think this little compact between us is quite workable; but if it is not, let’s discover that now, before we waste each other’s time.
 •• ∞ ••
 Here is a worthy test. Contrary to what you are being told daily, about recovering from this so-called Great Recession, our country is coming apart at the seams. It is on the verge of insolvency, and a devastating collapse of the economic engine, which keeps the wheels turning in our daily lives. Real actual employment statistics are dreadful, and are now at a 30 year low. Our population is growing faster than the job market, so they are steadily getting worse, not better. Already, the powers that be are robbing us blind, by devaluing our currency at an alarming pace, with no relief for the now nearly smoking printing presses, anywhere in sight.
The effects of this massive currency inflation, are just beginning to visibly affect our daily cost of living. It is about to get worse; much, much worse. Yet, with unemployment as high as it is, there is just no way for wages to keep pace with rising prices. It is imperative that those we hire to manage our national affairs, suck it up and get serious about addressing some really critical fiscal issues, or there won’t be a viable nation left to manage, in the frighteningly near future. The road to serfdom we are traveling as a nation abruptly ends, at a precipice now looming just ahead. The very next procrastinating kick, could easily send the proverbial can over the edge.
 •• ∞ ••
 Here is another test. It is an unassailable fact, that we have been deliberately lied to for our entire lives, by manipulative politicians, for their own nefarious purposes. One particular Big Lie, has been so ingrained into our nation’s political psyche for the past hundred years, that even those who know better, can’t help themselves repeating it ad nauseam, in their daily speech. How often do you hear the phrase “our democracy,” mouthed by a politician, pundit, or news reader? How often do you see it in print?
Folks, America is NOT a democracy; it is a republic, and the distinction is profound. Our Founders abhorred the very concept of democracy, which they considered just a fancy term for mob rule; or as Franklin purportedly put it, two wolves and a lamb discussing what to have for dinner. That is why they fashioned instead a constitutional republic, to protect the natural rights of the minority, from the whim of the majority; and each of us, as an individual, represents the ultimate minority. If this comes as news to you, I recommend a little research, for a much needed civics lesson.
The reason this Big Lie is so insidious, is that it gives voters the mistaken notion that the majority rules here in America. They assume that they can achieve any political goal they desire, if they can just get 51% of their neighbors to agree with them. Nothing could be further from the truth, in a country that is supposed to be governed by the rule of law, with a Constitution as the supreme law of the land, which pointedly constrains the lawmakers, from legislating outside narrowly defined limits. Too often, the rude discovery of this simple truth, leaves voters angry and jaded, when the elegance with which it secures our individual Liberty, should produce the opposite effect.
Few things irritate a true Constitutionalist more, than the inevitable partisan outcry that the ‘will of the people’ is being thwarted, when one of their pet referendums or legislative victories, is overturned by the courts as unconstitutional. Of course the majority’s will is being thwarted, and thank goodness! That is what the horizontal separation of powers is all about.
The independent courts exist to defend the Constitution, and the natural rights of any minority, from the capricious whim of the majority, in a self-governing republic. It is wrong to blame the judges for doing their jobs; blame belongs with the misguided lawmakers, for attempting to overstep theirs.
There is little wonder that voters are confused. This couldn’t happen in a democracy; yet they are continuously being told America is one, and convinced that the only way to defend themselves from the agenda of their ideological opponents, is to cajole, pander, and/or demagogue enough noncombatants, into a coalition to outvote them. This too is a lie.
Our freedom to reject assaults on our preferred cultural values, traditions, and institutions, can be defended on solid Constitutional grounds, using the tools of our Founders; our unalienable natural rights; our individual sovereignty; our precious individual Liberty; our Bill of Rights; civil disobedience if necessary; and if all else fails, there is always the reset button on our Constitution… the Second Amendment.
Abdicating these bedrock birthrights, opting instead for legislative activism, only perpetuates the Big Lie that America is a democracy, where hapless citizens are somehow bound to accept the whimsical will of the majority, however capricious, as the law of the land. Moreover, once a defensive coalition, of PC activists and less dogmatic sympathizers, does manage to recapture control of government, rank hypocrisy breaks out all over.
Everyone immediately switches roles and rhetoric. Not content with only an effective defense against political aggression, the victors reckon it is their turn to enact their own oppressive agenda. Their opponents, now in the minority playing defense, rediscover the value of the civil liberties they so recently trampled, cry foul, and get busy rebuilding their own majority coalition.
This vicious cycle just won’t do. It gets ever more divisive, bitter, and acrimonious. It has now reached a feverish pitch, near the boiling point. If we don’t find a way to cool passions soon, the next step could easily be a bloody civil war. All, because of the Big Lie, and the partisan rancor it naturally fosters. Most Americans are not partisans or activist cultural warriors, and just wish to live peaceful productive lives, in some semblance of tranquility. No wonder they detest politics, and endeavor to remain blissfully disengaged from the rank ugliness; opting instead, for ‘bread and circuses’ diversions.
While it drives the partisan GOTV organizers to distraction, choosing ‘none of the above,’ by the simple expedient of not bothering to vote, is not just a sign of voter apathy. It can be a very rational choice, for a decidedly concerned citizen, when our so-called two-party system, anoints two unpalatable duds. The system is so rigged against outsiders, who are deliberately ignored or marginalized by the chattering class, that mounting a grassroots challenge against them was nearly hopeless, before social networking arrived on the internet.
Voting for an independent or third-party candidate, can seem pointless when his votes won’t even be reported, in selective election night news coverage. Yet, voting for the lessor of two evils, risks encouraging the belief that he received a voter mandate for an unConstitutional agenda, when it was only marginally less objectionable than his opponent’s. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and to paraphrase Mark Twain, it doesn’t matter which Party one votes for, big government is elected.
 •• ∞ ••
 This illuminates another commonly held fallacy abroad in our land. There is nothing sacrosanct about our so-called two-party system. While it seems uniquely American, there is nothing in our Constitution remotely suggesting such a structure for our politics. Indeed, our founders tried to prevent any such thing, and direly warned us against allowing organized ‘factions,’ to creep into our political deliberations. It is entirely a subsequent invention of the politicians, by the politicians, and for the politicians.
Arguably, it really doesn’t even exist. Functionally, the Democrats and Republicans are merely two mildly competitive caucuses, of one monolithic Incumbrepublocrat Party. It is deliberately organized as an exclusive duopoly, with special emphasis on the incumbency component, for the benefit of the oligarchy of professional politicians. Whatever the ideological differences, between the actors in their grand demagogic kabuki theater, they readily set them aside and work in perfect harmony, on issues making third-party challenges to their duopoly nearly impossible, or furthering the advantages of incumbency in our elections.
It is tragic that they so seldom can manage, to do the same for the good of their country. This wasn’t always true, of course; there once were honorable statesmen, who could readily put country ahead of Party politics, in times of national crisis. We last witnessed a shining example of this, right after 9/11 over ten years ago, for a far too brief period. Unfortunately, the D’s are now totally dominated by the Politically Correct activists, and the R’s are increasingly beholden to the Piously Correct activists. Neither PC orthodoxy can brook compromise; their vicious culture war is a fight to the finish, and it is tearing this nation asunder.
 •• ∞ ••
 Which, brings me to request another indulgence. Remarkably, with all the weighty issues facing the next Congress, including very real existential threats to our continued existence as a nation, the questions I’m most often asked, by reporters and voters alike, is my position on divisive moral issues, such as abortion or gay marriage. Although I will always be as open, honest, and aboveboard with you as I can possibly be, I ask that you permit me to respectfully decline to answer such questions.
You see, I intend to take my vow to uphold and defend our Constitution very seriously. Nowhere in that venerable document, is any Federal official empowered to regulate the morality of the citizens he serves, in any manner whatsoever. To the extent that government can at all be properly involved in such matters, they are issues that the vertical separation of powers, enshrined in our Constitution, leaves to State and local venues, not our Federal government. Thus, my personal views on these divisive hot-button issues, are entirely irrelevant to the office I seek.
While there is nothing about my moral compass I have any reason to hide, if successful in my quest, I intend to represent the best interests of all of my constituents, within the narrowly defined scope of Congressional power, enumerated in Article I of our Constitution, which would always guide my actions in office. Nothing good, or beneficial to anyone, could come of my publicly taking a position, on cultural issues outside that purview.
Since Constitutionally, there is nothing I could do to advance them, those concurring with my positions might rightly wonder if I was being truthful, or just telling them what they wished to hear. Moreover, forcing my revelation would be counterproductive to them, since it would only alienate potential voters, sympathetic to the other side in their culture war. Those disagreeing with them, might rightly worry that if elected, I would feel obligated to repay the faction that supported me, by trying to enact Federal restrictions on their Constitutionally protected individual rights. For the record, no citizen of any stripe, need ever fear in the slightest that I would endeavor to violate our Constitution, in any manner whatever.
That, I can promise you, without equivocation. If you are looking for someone that would, in order to try to impose your social mores on others – I am not your man. On such culture war related matters, I would prefer that you think of me as your stalwart defender, of our Constitution and your precious Liberty, to exercise your free will in any manner you choose. I’ll work tirelessly to prevent your ideological opponents, from imposing their unwelcome agenda on you; but neither will I be your advocate, for imposing yours on them. I will defend everyone’s individual Liberty to the fullest extent possible, consistent with law and order.
 •• ∞ ••
 The Liber-T-Party movement, is the best hope for our nation’s salvation to come along, since Ross Perot stirred up disgruntled Patriots twenty years ago. I hope we learned from some of his organizational mistakes, and continue to resist efforts to organize nationally, into an official political party with a definitive platform. That is why I spell T-Party the way I do, to avoid any confusion with other groups engaged in such misguided endeavors.
Personally, I’ll not waste much time on the presidential kabuki dance; it looks like that theater will take care of itself. The ostensible capitalist, and thus the lesser evil of the two big-government supporting candidates, should have no difficulty unseating the committed Marxist usurper. This won’t do much to reverse the path toward self-destruction our nation is on; but if he makes the right moves to open up our domestic energy resources, the increased employment and revenue, could delay it long enough for us to elect enough Liber-T-Party independents, who will at least try.
We should focus on making ourselves felt in Congress, State, and local races. We can certainly collaborate with other groups, via social networking, etc. to share our experiences, and especially what works. Yet, I would caution that we are far more effective as an asynchronous organic grassroots movement, focused primarily on Liberty and the return to Constitutional government.
There is room for any Patriot with those basic ideals, be they Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Independent, or any other nominal affiliation. All Liberty loving Patriots are certainly welcome aboard my campaign. If this works for you, I would be grateful for your vote; and your active assistance, in helping me land the job.
 •• ∞ ••
 What Washington D.C. needs most right now, is serious adults actively engaged in meaningful deliberations, honestly seeking solutions to very serious problems; not partisan hacks, maneuvering for advantage in their next election. I’d be honored to be among them, representing this district. The incompetent can kickers are hopelessly stuck in campaign mode, and running out of road. The impassioned cultural warriors, seemingly oblivious to far weightier issues than lifestyle, tend to ascribe all our nation’s ills, to the evil motives of any who disagree with their PC worldview.
Perhaps unwittingly, this discourages many less dogmatic citizens, from even entering the arena. For those of us wishing to remain PC free. Who care enough for our history, our unalienable rights, and the future for our posterity to fight for them. We are blessed with a nation and Constitution, with a unique legacy of defending individual Liberty for all. It is well worth saving, and it appears to be left to us to save it. What say you, shall we get to work? â—„Daveâ–º
You said “The job I seek, is to faithfully represent the predominant views of the citizens of this district in Congress…”
Might I humbly suggest that you add to that sentence “so long as doing so would not cause me to violate the Constitution I will swear a solemn vow to protect, defend and uphold”
Troy
Good suggestion, Troy. It is done. I thought I had implied as much in several places; but stating it clearly up front is a good idea.
So, now that I have demonstrated my ability to put my finger in the wind, listen, and follow advice… do I get your vote? 🙂 â—„Daveâ–º
As to the part about voting for “the lesser of two evils”, you are right on. Why can’t the sheeple understand that, using that approach, the BEST they will ever get is a lesser evil. How can that be of value? Greater and lesser states of evil seen to me akin to one being totally or only partly pregnant.
Troy
There is an excellent article on the subject, which I know you would appreciate here:
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/838-the-lesser-of-two-evils-con-game
Enjoy… â—„Daveâ–º
If you don’t vote for the “lesser of two evils” the best you can hope for is the lesser of two evils whilst moving probabilities to the worst of two evils, think about it.
I have thought about it, John. If I lived in a battleground State and the polls were close, your argument might be persuasive. Think about this… If I recall correctly, you live in Washington and I live in CA. Obama has both of our States in the bag. They are dominated by dependent class ghetto dwellers and their apologists, who literally could no longer survive, without Federal entitlement programs. It would be irrational for them to vote otherwise. Thus, it is a complete waste of time, for either of us to vote for Romney, using some ‘lesser of two evils’ rationale.
In fact, doing so has the risk that he receives enough of a majority of the overall national popular vote total, to claim a mandate for his basic statist big government agenda. Is that the message you would wish to impart, with your otherwise feckless vote? Not me. I have no desire at all to endorse a SNAFU unConstitutional agenda. It would do the opposite of convincing the Republican establishment that we are fed up, and demand reform of the Federal behemoth, which they are as guilty as the Democrats for growing.
What would happen if Liber-T-Party Patriots living in solid blue States, voted instead for anybody but an Incumbrepublocrat, as a general protest vote? Doing so could easily throw the Incumbrepublocrats into a tailspin. Obama could end up with a substantial lead in the popular vote tally; but Romney would still have more than enough electoral votes to win the office. The clueless sheeple would be confused and Obama supporters would be outraged, necessitating some serious civics lessons, which is never a bad thing for potential voters.
Our power to pull it off, would be an unmistakable wake-up call for the Incumbrepublocrats. They could no longer just ignore us. Further, if we chose to all give our votes to one guy, say ex-Governor Gary Johnson, it could catapult the Libertarian Party into the big time. Regardless what one thinks of Libertarians, the idea of helping them break the stranglehold the cabal of oligarchs has over our politics, is most appealing. Why not let them break the trail for us?
Dispelling the fallacy abroad in our land, that there is something sacrosanct about our so-called two-party system, would be priceless. There is nothing whatever in our Constitution suggesting a duopoly for our political structure. Our Founders tried to warn us of the danger of even allowing ‘factions’ to ever arise in our Republic. It is entirely an invention of the politicians, by the politicians, and for the politicians. It is too late now, to take our Founder’s advice; but a multi-party system similar to European countries, would be far less problematic than ours.
I don’t worry about Obama’s reelection, John. Romney has it in the bag. He is ruthless, and will do whatever it takes to win. Obama’s coalition is disintegrating before our eyes, and even the fawning press has lost patience with the petulant “Amateur” usurper. He hasn’t a chance of recovering, without their continued cheer-leading and covering up for him.
I have lost interest in the center attraction of the grand kabuki theater of the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly. If we are truly interested in reestablishing Constitutional government in DC, we should be focusing our attention on down ticket races, and electing enough Liber-T-Party candidates to wrest control of Congress from the Incumbrepublocrats. â—„Daveâ–º
Our respective States do appear to be a couple of sink holes for independent voters. I don’t have a great degree of trust in “polls†so am never quite sure what will be the results of a particular election. So I don’t let them influence me as to which candidate I might support. You said:
“In fact, doing so has the risk that he receives enough of a majority of the overall national popular vote total, to claim a mandate for his basic statist big government agenda. Is that the message you would wish to impart, with your otherwise feckless vote? Not me. I have no desire at all to endorse a SNAFU un-Constitutional agenda.â€
So if the people who might have voted against him don’t vote, and he receives a mandate from the voters who do, he claims a mandate. Whereas if the “might have voted†had voted there might not have been a mandate or it would certainly not have been as big. Then there is always the perception that those who don’t vote are not worth considering in any case since they are too lazy or disinterested (not my opinion, in general, but held by some I have talked to).
There are times I have not voted for either candidate, generally when I have not been able to determine what their political principles are or they both stink so badly I just can’t do it. I am not sure Romney is that “ripe.†I know the other guy is a train wreck in process.If he keeps on in the directions he is going you may not have a Libertarian Party to vote for.
A mandate ought to presupose an overwhelming vote of approval. I would say anything less than 60% of the eligible voters (regardless of turn-out) should be a minimum to claim one. Certainly, if one were to sum the votes for all opposition candidates from any Party, and they exceeded the plurality winner’s total, he could not properly claim a mandate. â—„Daveâ–º