Liberty or Tyranny: The Choice is Ours

Between February 27, 2009, and today we learned something.

We learned that this administration is bent on ending republican government. Article IV of the Constitution — which guarantees a republican form of government to the states — means nothing to Obama, the Congressional majority, and Obama’s Supreme Court appointees. Obama rules by decree. Elena Kagan’s okay with banning books.

November 2 is our last chance to stop the free fall into tyranny.

In Missouri, passions rage this primary season. I understand. To a degree, I helped enflame those passions.  But that was before we fully understood what’s going on—before we realized that Barack Obama and the Congressional Democrats (not to mention Woody Allen and Ed Schultz) believe in tyranny.

On November 2, I will follow the advice of the wisest man I every met, William F. Buckley Jr. Buckley’s rule for picking a candidate was simple: “Always support the rightward-most, viable candidate.”

Some good, sincere people want to tear down candidates they believe are less than ideal.  In some election years, I’m inclined to do the same.  But not this year. Not with what we know.

In 2010, we have a choice between liberty and tyranny.  The candidates of one party will vote with the President on every issue on which he demands their loyalty.  We saw this in healthcare. We saw it in finance “reform.” We saw it on stimulus. We saw it on budget reconciliation. The President’s party would vote for human extinction if Obama asked them to.

In such a perverted environment, I believe we have a duty to stop the descent into tyranny, even if that means supporting a candidate who falls short of our ideal. To tear down the rightward-most, viable candidate is to tear down the last the defense against tyranny. If that’s why we started the Tea Party movement, then I wish it had been still-born.

Put another way, between Hamilton and Jefferson, I’d choose Jefferson.  But I wouldn’t destroy the one to elect the other.