Volume 8, Issue 8
Normally, a political debate is about policy and how it affects the constituent base. When one candidate seeks to derail the momentum of another candidate, at some point in the tirade, policy must be mentioned. Every strategist knows that when a candidate attacks another candidate personally, they receive as much negative backlash upon themselves as they set upon their opponent. Senator Warren was relentless in her attack on Mayor Bloomberg’s character saying that his past legacy surrendered him unfit to be President of the United States. What really bothers Elizabeth Warren more than anything else is simply that he is a billionaire. He represents a stratum of society that she despises. Powerful people with money are the essence of the root cause of most of the ills in society in her worldview.
The entire Democratic field in the last debate made a huge mistake by not taking Senator Bernie Sanders to task on his primary policy positions. Attacking Senator Sanders tonight will have much less effect because it is expected. His base support is the most fervent of any of the candidates. In that context, he is like Donald Trump. If Mayor Bloomberg directs his fire at Senator Sanders, not having repositioned his own campaign as a true campaign of the people, it will appear to Sanders supporters as persecution. Elizabeth Warren has already labeled Mayor Bloomberg without merit to criticize anyone. If all the candidates gang up on Senator Sanders tonight, he may emerge as simply the anti-establishment candidate. He is likely to finish no less than second in South Carolina and win Super Tuesday.
What’s really at stake for the Democratic Party is whether they will be able to make any argument to the American people that they still believe in at least some independence from government for citizens. No Democratic candidate bases their philosophy on the foundational principle of unrestrainedfreedom for the pursuit of happiness.
The natural law that our Founding Fathers so eloquently declared, afforded every individual unalienable rights from God.Freedom is the lifeblood of the human spirit. Not to even consider the critical essence of the nature of this law is philosophical malfeasance.
In a 60 Minute interview aired this past Sunday, Senator Sanders refused to criticize Fidel Castro’s dictatorship in Cuba. He tried to backtrack and correct his remarks Monday and dug himself a deeper hole. He pointed out that Castro made literacy a priority. He failed to mention that Castro’s regime was brutal in the arrest and murder of political rivals. Senator Sanders seems to think that any citizen sacrifice is a worthy price to pay for total government control.
This idea that socialism, although always having failed in the past, can still be achieved in the future with better management, is beyond the concept of rational thought. Socialism didn’t work in the Soviet Union when the size of the population and the amount of resources would have sustained a closed system if the structure had any merit. It didn’t work in the western democracy of Sweden in the 1960s. And it didn’t work in Cuba, period. The Soviet Union subsidized Cuba while the people still suffered.
It is said that Albert Einstein had an explanation and theory for this type of mindset. When one tries the same thing over and over again, by calculation or process that always fails, expecting a different result is the definition of ….madness.
The visceral attacks on Mayor Bloomberg come from a fear that individuals, left to their own means to achieve by pursuant oftheir God-given talents, will surpass society’s need for government control of citizens lives. Free enterprise produces an environment that noted economist Dr. Milton Friedman labeled an economic system wherein one is “free to choose.” Socialism produces limited economic options with the objective for government to control all outcomes. Elites keep society in check by limiting the individual’s “freedom to choose” his or her own economic destiny.
In attacking anyone who is self-made or independent from government, Elizabeth Warren exposes herself in her true motives. It is not that she just wants more government services more equally applied. She wants more equal outcomes,regardless of an individual’s desire to be free. In choosing government control as the basis of all policy, she shows the same lack of respect for Einstein’s theory.
Socialism is antithetical to unalienable rights. Why? Because freedom is a right from God that needs no government management. Government exists to facilitate freedom, and therefore, unalienable rights. In fearing natural law, it is really the fear of the human spirit that gives progressives such animated concern. For history has proven that the human spirit will always triumph over those who attempt to quarter its energy.
It may be too late for the Democratic candidates to attack Bernie Sanders for unaffordable policies. His base will see this as establishment corruption in search of maintaining power. If Elizabeth Warren joins in the attack with Mayor Bloomberg against Bernie Sanders, she will find herself without a base to compel or lead.
The Democratic candidates tonight, by design or emotion, will set the ideological premise for the general election.
The general election is shaping up as a decision for the American people. Americans must ask themselves: Will theytrust the natural law of ordained freedom or will they trust subterfuge rhetoric on government policy that has never workedand never will?
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?