"When a legislature decides to steal some of our rights and plans to use police force to accomplish it, what's the real difference between them and the thief? Darn little! They hide behind the excuse that they're legislating democratically. The fact they do it by a majority vote has no moral significance whatsoever. Numerical might does not constitute right, no more than a lynch mob can justify its act because a majority participated." ~ H.L. Richardson
Thy Kingdom Come...Undone
If it isn't Bush with the Republicans, it's Kerry with the Democrats. Even anti-statist libertarians are showering presidential-elect, Michael Badnarik, with support for the most coveted crown in the 'free' world. The Constitution Party honors Michael Peroutka as their next God. And then there's always Ralph Nader for the motley crew to follow. Government isn't the answer, we're told, but there are a whole host of candidates salivating for the presidential throne and plenty of supporters to try and get them there. Believe me, there's no shortage of hope in the government.
At any rate, no matter who the wolf in sheep's clothing is, why should we trust any one of them? I love libertarian principles but it makes no sense for a party that hates government so much to be ok with giving one man the kind of power and influence that libertarians froth at the mouth about. Michael Badnarik isn't cut from the same cloth, though, right? There's no way that the Washington Empire will corrupt his mind and judgment as it has with every president who has ever set foot in the White House. He's different, we're told. Why, I ask, do we fall for this worn-out explanation every time someone covets the presidency?
No man, libertarian or fascist, should have the ability to control the entire planet in the manner that the presidency allows. The president can do whatever he wants and has been able to do so since time immemorial. I refuse to believe that a libertarian or another non-Republican/non-Democratic king would be any different than the presidents that have preceded him.
It doesn't matter who the man is. What matters is the position that is bestowed upon the man. No flesh and blood human being, with all his good intentions and dreams to better the world, can resist the two trillion taxpayer dollars that are laid at his feet to spend as he pleases. And spend he will. This kind of supremacy can only invigorate a man to go on unadulterated shopping sprees. The position is doomed to alter a human being into a thief, a savage brute, a warmongering monarch, and a pathological liar. To this end, the presidency has not disappointed.
Logically speaking, the presidency should be eliminated if we really are a free country that wishes to spread freedom around the world. The president is the single, most persevering barrier to world peace and freedom that we have. Voting for a president only encourages immorality and death around the world. How many innocent people have suffered or have been killed because of our damn presidency?
All I know is that the British Empire couldn't have been this bad, could it? For our ancestors to secede, things must have been intolerable. Intolerable they were. Historical writings point to how much free reign the King of England had to imprison, tax, and regulate individuals, businesses, and services he did not approve of. No one was bold enough to get in his way or eliminate his position of authority because so many were numbed out with the kind of power he had. That sure sounds like a president to me.
Whispers on the internet point to secession movements more and more everyday. Don't think the King of America won't try and stop it, either. What frustrates me is how it has to come to chatter of secession before we finally realize that the presidency is inherently wrong and counterintuitive to the provocation of liberty. You could stick Gumby in the Oval Office and still get the same old war-provoking, money-grubbing, 'do-it-my-way' results. The presidency simply must go.
But I'm preaching to the choir on STR. I should be writing to the ultra-liberal and ultra-conservative websites (not that they would ever publish such blasphemy). To excoriate their candidate, much less the throne he longs for, is a practice in futility. Taking down one president is like trying to get a line to move at the DMV. Getting rid of the presidency itself would be next to impossible. In childlike fashion, too many people plug their ears with their fingers about such suggestions and scream 'la-la-la-la!' at the top of their lungs. 'Can't hear you! I have to do my duty and vote in November! La-la-la-la! Go away you traitor!'
I guess we really do get the government we deserve. If America keeps supporting such recklessness and irresponsibility, what else are we to expect? If force is what we want, force is what we will get. Voting for and worshipping a president will assure us of obtaining all the force we want, whether it is used against Muslims in the Middle East or eventually against us and our neighbors. America loves its force because it loves its presidents and vice-versa. So shut up, smile, and wave your little stars-and-stripes flag, you anti-American bastards!
Tempted as I may be to give up, reason always finds a way to win. It's slow and arduous but it eventually musters up the liberty that human beings crave. Centuries ago, Thomas Paine's writings changed public opinion in a relatively short amount of time and aided America in winning the freedom that we give so much lip-service and fireworks displays to these days. Reason, not presidential campaigns, is what I will continue to spend my time on.
With all of the emotionalism and religious fervor in this country, it is no wonder why so many worship the presidency. However, by stubbornly promoting principles of reason, I'm encouraged with thoughts that the love for our presidency will gradually fade. This is where my hope lies.