Jon Voight is a true champion of liberty. When he appeared on “Huckabee” last Saturday, it was a refreshing change from the usual cast of progressives and radicals whom Huckabee welcomes on board each week.
Voight is one of those rare celebrities who is not afraid to be specific in his criticisms of Barack Obama and his congressional allies. In his “Huckabee” appearance, he was clear and adamant in assuring the audience that the charges of hatred and racism against the tea-party people are completely without merit. He then read a letter he had written to “the people of America.”
In one year, the American people are witnessing the greatest lie that is cleverly orchestrated by Barack Obama and his whole administration. The lie is a potent aggression that feeds the needs of people who either have not educated themselves enough to understand the assault upon us all, or the very poor and needy who live to be taken care of.
President Obama feeds these people poison, giving them the idea that they’re entitled to take from the wealthier, who have lived and worked in a democracy that understands that capitalism is the only truth that keeps the nation healthy and fed.
Now, the lie goes very deep, and President Obama has been cleverly trained in the Alinsky method. And it would be very important that every American knows what that method is. It is a socialistic, Marxist teaching, and with it, little by little, he rapes this nation, taking down our defenses, making new language for the Islamic extremists. …
President Obama uses his aggression and arrogance for his own agenda against the will of the American people, when he should be using his will and aggression against our enemies.
(The entire interview is available online.)
In keeping with his ongoing efforts to stake claim to the title of the Progressives’ Favorite Republican, Huckabee was quick to point out that where he disagrees with Voight is that he believes Barack Obama sincerely wants to do what is best for America. And, in a perverse sort of way, he’s right. Obama sincerely believes that socialism – more likely, communism – is what is best for America.
But what else would you expect of a man who doesn’t believe that the new health-care bill should be repealed and recently welcomed Michelle Obama as his featured guest, gushing all over her while the two of them pretended as though her passion in life is to fight childhood obesity. The only passion Michelle Obama has with children is to indoctrinate them into thinking like good little socialists who will look to an all-powerful central government to take care of them.
So much for Huckabee … now let’s segue to Monday and “The O’Reilly Factor,” which is always a good bet if you’re in a masochistic mood. With great interest, I watched O’Reilly’s interview of Mitt Romney. Once again, Romney tried to defend Romneycare in Massachusetts, the forerunner of the totalitarian-implemented, economy-crushing Obamacare. I was truly embarrassed for the man.
Don’t get me wrong. Romney is not Mike Huckabee, who dreams of pulling together a coalition of evangelicals, disenchanted Democrats and liberal-leaning independents as a way to sneak into the White House. Romney is basically a good man with a great deal of business acumen. And, by today’s standards, I guess you could call him a capitalist – meaning that he is a philosophically confused capitalist.
From whence came Romneycare. If the man would just come right out and say, as he kind of did with his change of heart on abortion, that he now understands why his disastrous health-care creation was a mistake – and that’s why he is now committed to repealing Obamacare – many would forgive him. After all, everyone makes mistakes.
But Barackobitis – inflammation of that part of the brain that makes it possible for a person to admit to his mistakes – has clearly attacked Romney’s gray matter. One of his chief arguments in defending his indefensible Romneycare – that the federal government’s payment of 50 percent of Massachusetts’ health-care program is just a matter of “redirecting funds” – was beyond the pale. It was the same old Republican mistake – an establishment blue suit saying that he’s proud that he prevented an increase in spending. An actual reduction in spending, of course, is never on the table.
After watching Huckabee and Romney, I’ve decided, in my typical thoughtful manner, to warn Republicans that in the event a presidential election takes place in 2012, they had better start looking for some new blood. Huckabee and Romney are more of the same – big-spending politicians who have dominated the Republican Party for decades.
One of the great features of capitalism is that it weeds out inefficient, outdated businesses, which makes room for efficient, modern enterprises. Ditto with politics. It’s time for the old-guard, business-as-usual Republicans to be weeded out by small-government advocates who have no interest in reaching out to progressives who want to continue the suicidal strategy of increasing the size and scope of government.
From where I sit at this point in time, the Republicans to whom the majority of Americans (read, tea-party people) can most relate to are Sen. Jim DeMint, Rep. Michele Bachmann and, of course, Rep. Ron Paul. But don’t be surprised if some fresh new faces appear on the scene between now and 2012. (Marco Rubio, Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal may or may not be serious contenders in 2016.)
And if the Republican establishment rejects those new faces, maybe the tea party will have no choice but to become the Tea Party – in which case the Republican Party will join the Whigs in the scrap heap of political history.