Mitt Romney Must Be Defeated This November

Let us remember what it is that this election is not about:  Anyone but Obama.  It is not what it is.  It is a losing strategy. 

I will post this disclaimer:  I am a Libertarian, not a conservative.  I support less government and less regulation across the entire spectrum of issues, both fiscal/economic, and social/moral.  From my perspective, all of the previous and current Republican presidential candidates with the exceptions of Gary Johnson and Ron Paul support big government and more regulation in at least one area.  The same is true with most conservative pundits including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt, Bill O'Reilly, and Mark Levin.  I am a Life member of the Libertarian Party, and as such I support our candidates.  If our presidential candidate, Gary Johnson, can help pull enough votes away from Mitt Romney to cost him the election, so much the merrier.  Barack Obama is far worse than Mitt Romney, so why do I say this?  I'll state my case and let you, the reader, decide.

In 2004 the mantra of the Democrats was "Anyone but Bush."  In 2008 it was "Anyone but Obama."  Mitt Romney has given liberty lovers no reason to vote FOR him, only to vote against the greater of the two evils.  This is not a winning strategy.  Based on a long term perspective of the health and vitality of the USA, it would be better long term if Obama were to defeat Romney this November.  Why?  Let's look at some election history.

In 1992 the greater of the two evils, Bill Clinton, won the presidency.  The first two years of his term were bad.  But had he not won that election, the first Republican revolution in 1994 would not have happened.  Democrats would have maintained control of congress.  The glorious gridlock that occurred between the Democrat president and Republican congress would never have existed.  President George H. W. Bush would have raised taxes again in the same manner as did President Bill Clinton.  Vice President Dan Quayle would have been the Republican nominee in 1996.

Had Al Gore won in 2000, the first two years of his term would have been like what we have had now, with a Democrat controlled Senate.  This happened anyway with George W. Bush once Jumping Jim Jeffords jumped sides.  True, the Bush tax cuts would not have happened.  But the expensive Afghanistan and Iraq wars would not have happened either.  And it is likely that the Republicans would have taken over congress in the 2002 midterm elections, resulting in glorious gridlock. Federal spending would then have been less under Gore than it was under Bush.

Had John McCain won in 2008 there would be no outcry over big government, no Tea Party, no strong liberty movement.  Instead the conservative pundits would be lauding President McCain over his dealing with those nasty Islamoterrorists in Libya and Iran.  The House would still be controlled by Nancy Pelosi.  The people would not have been awakened like they were starting in 2009.

Sure we have a long way to go in the advancement of liberty.  But history shows that voting for the lesser of the two evils only slows down the liberty train in the long run.  Mitt Romney will do nothing to advance our cause.  Slowing down the runaway big government train before it reaches the cliff does nothing to advance the cause of liberty and freedom.  It merely sedates the citizens from the reality of the situation, as it did for eight years under George W. Bush, who with a Republican controlled congress for four of those years increased government spending and regulation like there was no tomorrow.

The current Republican-controlled congress under House Speaker John Boehner has outspent the previous Democrat-controlled congress under previous House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  What will happen with out of control spending if their man Mitt Romney wins the presidency?  All pretense of government gridlock will cease.

When viewed from a long term perspective, it is imperative that Mitt Romney be defeated this November.  Republican primary voters went into the voting booths this past primary season and enthusiastically pulled the lever for perhaps the biggest government candidate out of the original 13 that were running.  Don't thank them and reward them by voting for their guy this November.  These Republican primary voters need a good virtual spanking at the polls in the same manner that they got in 2008.  Their big government "electable" savior, Mitt Romney, must go down in defeat.

Does this mean I am voting for Barack Obama?  No way!  I will vote for the Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson.  What about writing in Ron Paul in November?  Before you do that, check the election laws of your state.  In my state, Indiana, Ron Paul's write-in vote will not count unless he officially files as a write-in candidate; something he has not done.  A write-in vote that is not counted is truly a wasted vote.  Remember this.  And vote accordingly.