And Then They Ignore You Again…
by Eric Phillips
by Eric Phillips
DIGG THIS
Watching the
Republican Presidential Debate on CNN was exasperating. I thought
it was bad enough when, during the previous debate, the Fox News
moderators cut the Paul-Giuliani
Exchange short to ask John McCain about the extremely pressing
issue of…the Confederate flag flying over the statehouse. It turns
out, however, that Wolf Blitzer and Co. are far more concerned with
flippant issues than the neocons at Fox News. They made certain
to pester the candidates about whether they believed in evolution
or not and what the policy should be towards gays in the military,
while not even touching on constitutional interpretation, the disgraceful
state of the nation’s government schools, the $9 trillion public
debt, or the government’s
absurd and disastrous attempt to impose a democratic, drug-free,
Taliban-free, Tajik-and-Uzbek-dominated Afghanistan on the nation’s
impoverished, strict Muslim and largely Pashtun populace.
Nonetheless
nine of the candidates still managed to construct an anti-liberty,
anti-capitalist message, despite their contentions otherwise. Romney,
for example, remains convinced that his
compulsory health insurance program for Massachusetts is a free
market solution that promotes personal responsibility. He was not
all that clear on how the government deciding what’s best for people
and then forcing them to do it makes people responsible, though.
Giuliani still thinks he’s a free market candidate even though he
explicitly endorsed government-run nation building. But McCain,
you see, is opposed to overspending. He’d get rid of all those pork-barrel
projects that cost taxpayers $29 billion in 2006…out of a budget
of over $2 trillion. Maybe he can also enlist the help of fellow
candidate Tommy Thompson in reforming
that stockpiling program at the Dept. of Health and Human Services
that has some inefficiencies. But seriously, to the extent that
any of these candidates support the market, they do so to make the
state more efficient. As
Lew points out, neither the mainstream left nor right believes
in true liberty.
Thankfully,
Dr. Paul reminded me why I am paying such close attention to this
race by using his time on the "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell"
question to argue eloquently for individualism. Homosexuality is
not really the issue, Paul replied, because "We don’t get our
rights because we’re gays or women or minorities. We get our rights
from our creator as individuals. So every individual should be treated
the same way." He continued, "If there is homosexual behavior
in the military that is disruptive, it should be dealt with. But
if there’s heterosexual sexual behavior that is disruptive, it should
be dealt with." Paul’s response left the next candidate, Mike
Huckabee, stuttering in agreement. Instead of offering vague "pro-life,
pro-values" rhetoric, Paul offered a thoughtful philosophical
response and a practical application thereof.
Likewise, Paul
exposed the absurdity of many of the candidates’ support for "pro-life,
whole-life" policies by decrying their calls for preemptive
– and possibly nuclear – military action against Iran. "We
have in the past," he contended,
Always declared
war in the defense of our liberties or go to aid of somebody.
But now we have accepted the principle of preemptive war – we
have rejected the Just War theory of Christianity. We have to
come to our senses about this issue of war and preemption and
go back to traditions and our constitution and defend our liberties
and defend our rights.
Indeed, deep
respect for and love of life does not go well with support for preemptive
war, acceptance of "collateral damage," and openness to
the idea of deploying tactical nuclear weapons.
Unfortunately,
there were no outbursts this time that will help garner more mainstream
media attention for the campaign. Il
Duce did demand to know how anyone expected to fight the war
on terrorism without invading Iraq (maybe by dealing with the people
who actually attacked us? Just a thought), but was very reserved
in dealing with Paul – perhaps intentionally. When Blitzer asked
for Giuliani’s response to Paul’s interpretation of the United States’
current wars, he declined to call the Doctor’s assertions absurd
or to demand a retraction. He simply declared that he was going
to offer a different view. Indeed, the entire debate seems to have
been formatted to allow Rudy
McRomney a virtual monologue at the expense of the lesser-known
candidates. I think I’m going to have to modify Gandhi’s famous
quote that I referenced in my
previous article. First they ignore you, then they laugh at
you, then they fight you, and then they realize that ignoring you
worked best so they go back to that.
June
7, 2007
Eric
Phillips [send him mail]
is a disaffected inhabitant of Washington, DC who studies history
and economics at George Washington University.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
|