November 1, 2012 Archived column: http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/5229
With the 2012 Presidential election just a few days away, it is almost superfluous for me to engage in any kind of in depth discussion, as most people cannot, for the life of them, get past the political theater that is currently crescendoing to a climax. Therefore, I will simply provide readers with a few passing thoughts regarding the elections next week.
I think Mitt Romney will somewhat comfortably win the Presidential election. This will cause â€œconservatives,â€ Christians, and most Republicans to go into a state of deep hibernation, which will allow Romney to wreak havoc upon the Constitution and liberties of the people. In 2012, Barack Obama is the â€œBoogeymanâ€ that must defeated at all costs. But the fact is, with the exception of Romneyâ€™s more business-friendly approach to economics, the differences between Obama and Romney are negligible.
As I have noted in previous columns, the differences between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are miniscule on virtually every salient issue. They both supported TARP; they both supported Obamaâ€™s economic stimulus package; they both supported so-called assault weapons bans and other gun control measures; Obama has an â€œFâ€ rating from Gun Owners of America, while Romney has a â€œD-â€ rating from GOA; neither man supports a balanced budget; neither man opposes foreign aid; they both supported the bailout of the auto industry; they both have a track record of being big spenders; they both fully support the Federal Reserve; they both oppose a full audit of the Fed; they are both supporters of universal health care; both men are showered with campaign contributions from Wall Street; neither of them wants to eliminate the IRS or the direct income tax; both men are on record as saying the TSA is doing a â€œgreat jobâ€; they both supported the NDAA, including the indefinite detention of American citizens without due process of law; they both supported the renewal of the Patriot Act; they both believe that the President has â€œexecutive powerâ€ to assassinate and kill; both support the â€œfree tradeâ€ agenda of the global elite; they are both soft on illegal immigration; they both support NAFTA and CAFTA; they both have a history of appointing liberal judges; they both believe the President has the authority to take the nation to war without the approval of Congress; and neither of them has any qualms about running up more public debt to the already gargantuan debt of 16 trillion dollars.
Judge Andrew Napolitano nailed it when he said, â€œBarack Obama loves Big Labor; Mitt Romney loves Big Business; but they both love Big Government.â€
Steve Baldwin (no relation) agrees. Steve is a former California State legislator and former Executive Director of the Council for National Policy. He said:
â€œAs someone who was asked by one of the presidential candidates to investigate Romneyâ€™s gubernatorial record, I can assure you there is little in Romneyâ€™s background to suggest he will be a Reagan-type president willing to undertake bold action to save our economy and restore our culture. I know every bill he signed and every statement he made as Governor. I know who his appointees were and the liberal vision that governed his actions. As Massachusetts Governor, he sided with the big government types in every crisis he faced. Indeed, he repeatedly sold out constitutional rights--freedom of religion, the 2nd amendment, etc., every time he had the opportunity to do so.
â€œHe raised taxes on the private sector, destroyed job creation when he implemented RomneyCare, and came out in support of amnesty for illegal aliens. Most of his judicial appointees were to the left of Obamaâ€™s two appointments to the Supreme Court. As governor, he led the country in advancing three of the leftâ€™s most sacred issues: Cap and Trade, socialized medicine and gay marriage. Romney even supported Obamaâ€™s bailouts and the useless $8 billion stimulus. And heâ€™s hostile to the notion of engaging in serious budget cuts, telling one reporter, â€˜Iâ€™m not going to cut $1 trillion in the first year.â€™
â€œLetâ€™s not also forget that Romneyâ€™s advisors actually met with Obamaâ€™s advisors on a dozen occasions to assist them with designing ObamaCare! Itâ€™s no surprise that Romney is refusing to call ObamaCare a tax, even though itâ€™s the largest middle class tax hike in American history. The reason for this is because, while governor, his RomneyCare plan--the model for ObamaCare--was attacked as a tax and he argued it wasnâ€™t.
â€œIn other words, ObamaCare has been taken off the table as a campaign issue because Romney is afraid of being portrayed as a hypocrite for his past statements on this issue. This is reason number 167 why Romney should never have become our nominee.
â€œI donâ€™t care how his campaign portrays him today, his record as Governor is far more indicative of how he will govern than his campaign sound bites. If youâ€™re not familiar with what I am disclosing about Romney, itâ€™s because the truth about Romney was kept from Republican voters. Yes, the conservative movement sold out to Romney. Starting in 2004, Romney created a slew of PACS and foundations that funneled thousands of dollars to hundreds of conservative groups, think tanks, grass roots leaders and GOP entities.
â€œIn return, many of these entities that normally would have attacked Romney during the presidential primary went silent or even promoted him. Iâ€™ve tracked all of Romney contributions to conservative and GOP groups and itâ€™s disgusting. It means that the leadership of our own conservative movement is up for the highest bidder and cannot be trusted to do the right thing. Even National Review, the nationâ€™s leading conservative publication, took money from Romney and for the last six years blocked all articles critical of Romney. Instead, they published a slew of articles portraying him to be a conservative superstar. It was all phony and I can prove it.â€
Even though Romney will promote at least 85% of the Obama agenda, conservatives have no fear or trepidation of Romney because he is a Republican, whereas Obama scares the pants off of them because he is a Democrat. Ah, donâ€™t you just love partisan politics?
Therefore, as I said, absent massive vote-fraud, Romney will be our next President. But he will do NOTHING to stem the tide of coming disaster. Romney will be a military hawk of the highest order. And while corporations doing business with the military-industrial complex will reap huge profits, Americaâ€™s continued foreign interventionism is going to bring us to the brink of World War III. Furthermore, it is the â€œwe are at warâ€ mantra that is used to justify a burgeoning police state in America, which Romney will enthusiastically continue to implement. And unlike the Democrat Barack Obama, the Republican Mitt Romney will have little resistance--except from a Democrat-controlled Senate.
Republicans will maintain control of the House of Representatives, which is probably a good thing; Democrats will probably control the Senate. Between the two, I had much rather have Republicans control the House, because trying to find honest-to-God freedomists among Republican US senators (you could count them on two hands) is like trying to find henâ€™s teeth. Again, Romney isnâ€™t going to appoint freedomist judges anyway, so that argument is moot. But if the first six years of this century proved anything, it proved that neither major party in Washington, D.C., can be trusted with control of both chambers of Congress and the White House. That is a recipe for disaster!
At this point, I must remind readers that the reason Barack Obama was elected to begin with was due to the eight years of the phony-conservative G.W. Bush administrations. Americans were disillusioned and angry over Bushâ€™s huge spending habits at home and his military adventurism overseas. I predict a Mitt Romney presidency will have the same effect. As with G. W. Bush, Mitt Romney will disappoint and anger the American electorate, which will pave the way for another leftist (Hillary Clinton?) to prevail in 2016.
â€œAnd the beat goes on.â€
At some point--maybe toward the end of Romneyâ€™s first term--the chickens are going to come home to roost. Neither major party has the guts to do what it takes to put America on a solid financial footing.
They are both beholden to too many parasites that are sucking the lifeâ€™s blood out of our country. And neither party will do a darn thing to stop this fascination with empire that is putting our troops in killing fields all over the world. The result: itâ€™s only a matter of time before the inevitable happens. And just about anybody with half a brain knows it!
It would be nice if a few states would elect freedomist governors, attorney generals, sheriffs, legislators, senators, secretaries of State, etc., next Tuesday. At the end of the day, freedom is going to be won or lost at the State level anyway. My son, Tim Baldwin, is running for a Montana House seat. Here is his website:
I know of a handful of other freedomists in Montana and around the country who, if elected, could make a real difference in their respective states. Weâ€™ll see.
So, if it makes you feel better, vote for Mitt Romney. Heâ€™s probably going to win anyway--but it wonâ€™t matter! But, by all means, when you find a for-real freedomist to vote for in the other races, be sure you do that, because that WILL matter!