The Ramblings of an Independent Voter: What kind of America do you want?

In my last blog post, I explained some common terms that we need to understand in order to choose effectively. I also made the disclaimer that I am no historian, nor do I believe I know it all. I’m simply a girl who started on a journey to get some answers just over a year ago. I’m sharing the info as I see it because I had some friends who asked me to share. You certainly don’t have to agree, or even read it for that matter.

For me, the question is: What kind of America do you want to see going forward? It seems oddly simple; however, a lot of people I’ve asked cannot tell me. Everyone can tell me what are who they don’t like and list a host of complaints, but very few clearly articulate the America they want. This is how I see our options and what bothers me about each (in red):

1.  Do you want to live in a socialist society? 

Living in a socialist society allows the government to control the bulk of your money to distribute it (through taxation) “for the good of all in the society”. You receive more benefits as a citizen of that country, but the tradeoff is higher taxes and less control over your family and life. For example, the government provides healthcare, education, and jobs. This sounds great and may be for some people. The other side is that you indebt yourself to that same government. Some argue that we are already there, and others argue that it’s a step toward communism that we must stop.

I have an issue with this on a personal level for a number of reasons. First, I am a constitutionalist who believes that my rights are given to me by a Creator, not by a government. The Declaration that led to the Constitution assured that we were always represented so the majority could not control everyone. In a Republic, minorities are represented. I’m a liberty girl who enjoys the fact that if I don’t like my station in life, I have an option (or two or three) to change things. If we are tired of government involvement, why in the world would I vote to give it more?

2. Do you want to live in an authoritarian society?

Remember that authoritarianism is where order and control is valued over personal freedom, and the person in charge doesn’t have to answer to the people/constitution. The person in charge-king, or president- makes decisions without the consent of the representatives or the people at large. In other words, in this world people are often scared into submission, or the leader uses force/executive power to get way. 

We’ve spent years complaining about Obama and griping about his executive orders and love for skipping the process of changing laws. This is a step toward authoritarianism and Trump. Although Trump says he disagrees with Obama’s use of executive order, he will be glad to use them himself if necessary. When pushed further, he says that it’s okay for him to use it because he’s right. He also tries to take from people by calling on his Washington Cronies, like when he used eminent domain to take property from owners who don’t want to sell to him. He’s also said over and over that he will say whatever he needs to say in order to get into the White House. He admitted recently that he would change once he got the nomination.

That’s all scary, but even worse is the fact that he hasn’t even really been vetted because the media never goes after him like they do others. NBC recently purchased a documentary (and all the raw footage) to use if he gets the nomination. It’s ugly, including details about his failing businesses, his lying, his womanizing-including when his ex-wife accused him of rape- etc. and the Republicans will likely lose if he’s the nominee.

3. Do you want to live in the progressive state?  

A progressive government is ever-changing. It has been described by some as a necessary evil because you must change in order to keep up with the current situation. Others have described it as a slower move towards socialism, which seems to be a step towards communism. At any rate, the point of progressives is to move things around according to the current need.

This is what we have had in the White House, both Republican and Democrat, since Reagan left. We saw progressivism with the Bushes, Clinton, and certainly with Obama. To me, it’s hard to pinpoint an exact definition that makes sense because when it’s said that we need to evolve, that seems reasonable. The problem with it is that if you change every time the mood strikes you or on every whim of the collective group, you can quickly get away from principle and thus the things that made you who you were in the beginning. Just know that of the candidates running, your progressives are Clinton, Bush, Christie (who just dropped out), and Kasig. If you want things to continue as they are and slowly move on down this same path, these are your folks.

4. Do you want to live in a conservative society?

      A conservative is typically a person who typically holds a more traditional view of things, especially when it comes to abortion, marriage, and religion/values. These people are usually a little more fiscally cautious in spending, and they tend to be more outspoken about Christian values. Freedom of speech and the Right to Bear Arms are areas on which they focus. 

     Over time, many conservatives have opted to wheel and deal with their more liberal counterparts; therefore, the conservative movement has taken a lot of hits. If you want a more conservative candidate, Marco Rubio (and probably Ben Carson-although it is doubtful he’ll advance much further) is your guy. He is conservative in many ways, but his stance on immigration and the NSA (saying it’s okay for the government to spy on its citizens) have made this questionable. More and more often, conservatives are falling into this category because of the fear of ISIS.
      
      5. Do you want to live in a constitutional society?

      A constitutionalist knows it backwards and forwards, and every decision made comes from that understanding. Most constitutionalists understand the importance of the Declaration of Independence and what it says about our inalienable rights-that they come from the Creator rather than government or any other man. The Founding Fathers made clear that they were creating a government FOR the people and wanted to make clear that a government should not change on the whims of the moment. However, they also made it clear that if a government (established by We the People) oversteps its bounds and repeatedly abuses its authority, the people have the right to abolish that government and do something else that will secure the future of our children and our safety as a nation.

     That being said, a constitutionalist can be unpopular because they don’t change their minds just because it’s a “good thing” or on “their side”. They focus on reducing the size of government and getting rid of regulations on citizens and businesses. They believe the primary focus of government is to protect America and the future of our children. They believe society should, for the most part, self-regulate but agree to organize under a central government and to live by certain laws that pass only because our representatives vote on those laws. In essence, they are okay with change, as long as it adheres to the basic idea that all men are created equal and should have the same level playing field. If you like the idea of this type of government, you are looking at Ted Cruz.

My view on these things

               

I have semi-stated them above. My big thing is this: In America, we currently have the freedom to choose whatever we would like to have in government. You can totally disagree with me and want something different than I want. All I ask is that you educate yourselves and know what you really want and know the real candidates rather than the ones they show us on TV. Yes, it takes time, but I believe our future is worth it. We are on track to be the first generation to leave our children worse off than we had it. There’s something really wrong with that.

As I said earlier, I’m a liberty girl-a Constitutionalist. I can disagree with your morals and values but still believe that you should have the same freedom of speech that I am given. That’s part of it. The most recent, and best, example of this is Ted Cruz in Iowa. In short, Iowa receives government monies to subsidize their ethanol research. The governor of Iowa said people shouldn’t vote for Cruz because he wants to take away their money. Cruz stood before the people of Iowa and admitted that yes, he does think it best to phase this money out. He said that the government isn’t supposed to pick and choose who will survive in a free market economy, and he followed up with explaining that he wants ethanol to work but fair and square. The people of Iowa heard the truth and voted for him anyway. He didn’t pander to them, and he focused on the constitution…where everyone gets the same chance and free market is allowed to work. I believe that's how it should be.

I really struggle with the idea that so many people want to give more over to the government. We complain about government-run anything-schools, post office, etc. We see waste and fraud, and we witness LOTS of crony capitalism through closed door deals with both parties. Now, we want to vote in people who plan to give the government more? It’s just a matter of how fast they want to give it away. I’m not down with that. I’m also not okay with going against my principles to get what I want. If I do that, I’m no better than what we have now. I don’t want another political bully who doesn’t see the big picture or look to the constitution. I’ve looked at all of the candidates, their pasts, their records, and their proposals in an effort to find just one who stands for the same liberty that I crave. I believe I’ve found that candidate. 

Here are a couple of great articles that might help: 
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/26/donald-trump-policy-threaten-global-economy?CMP=share_btn_fb
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/#3cb994d63a1d
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democracy_vs_Republic