O'Donnell nomination permanently dooms Tea Party

Yesterday’s victory for Tea Party Express-backed Christine O’Donnell in Delaware is a stark example of the false choice presented to American voters year after year.

The exact same interventionist foreign policy of George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama is rearing its ugly head in what began as a truly populist uprising. When we talk about the “Tea Party” in early 2009 after Rick Santelli of MSNBC’s now famous call to arms on national TV that shocked many Americans from their slumber, we talk about people who “don’t want to reward failure” or “pay their neighbor’s mortgage”. At its roots an anti-tax and anti-nanny government awakening.

But now as the election season unfolds and the mainstream media continues to ignore truly libertarian Principled candidates, those same activists and voters are allowing wholly ridiculous double-speak cronies to present the choice the private Federal Reserve shareholders would like them to make. A choice that leads to more war, more money manipulation, and more corporatism.

Christine, from all she has presented, is either well-intentioned and ignorant of a favorable economic and societal structure or is an opportunist and chooses to deceive. Hard to tell, but her message sounds a lot like another wholly compromised Tea Party-backed “victory” for Colorado’s Republican Senate candidate Dan Maes’.

Stick to “tax for welfare” and ignore our massive spending on an aggressive interventionist foreign policy and ever-expanding police state. She gives us hints with her eager acceptance of Tea Party Express/neo-con funding to the tune of $250,000 according to the Weekly Standard. And her true and open giddiness for the obligatory Sarah Palin endorsement.

She shows us there are limits to the freedom she’d grant the citizens of Delaware when she said you should “be allowed to use your unique God-given creativity to provide for your family. Capitalism is getting a bad name, they’re trying to say ‘capitalism breeds greed’. Unbridled capitalism sure, but again that is why we have a system of checks-and-balances in our Constitution.”

It’s exactly those kind of ignorant misrepresentation of fact that the banksters want people to believe and applaud to. Many libertarians would say (a) Capitalism got a bad name from her Party; not a mystical “they” (TARP, war for oil, etc.) (b) The Constitution provides checks-and-balances on the government; not the economy or the free exchange of goods and services between consenting adults.

Now, qualify that with the fact that she is a much better option for the everyday person that gets up every morning and goes to work than Mike Castle, a true pig that had held a House seat since ‘92 and who bought cap-and-trade and TARP hook, line, and sinker. And definitely better than the Democrat shill that championed Obamacare and an Afghanistan escalation; but mostly because she is the only pro-2nd Amendment option.

Still haven’t heard the words “sound money” or “un-Constitutional wars” come out of her mouth and I don’t recommend holding your breath.

Delaware Senator Democrat Ted Kaufman even let the cat out of the bag about the Federal Reserve banking cartel when he said we need laws to “ensure financial stability by separating speculative and risky investment activities from the government-guaranteed portion of our financial industry, as well as mandating limits on the size and leverage of our shadow banks.”

She does say that she would audit Federal agencies “to reform or eliminate them” and to “never vote to increase taxes”. That sounds like a good thing for freedom, but wholly ambiguous. Which ones Christine? Do the CIA or IRS make the cut? NSA or FBI? HUD or FDA?

Willing to decrease taxes instead of “not increasing”? Probably not, since according to her site (before it became a static “donate” page) Americans need to maintain “a strong military and intelligence presence”. So, are we just going to limit cuts to domestic social welfare programs? And continue to maintain military bases in over 700 locations in 153 countries?

People that have no idea that their neighbor’s mortgage isn’t the problem or even recent revelations of almost a million “stimulus” dollars going to “genitalia cleansing” research at UCLA.

The real problem lies in an over-reaching, blowback-inducing, corporate sponsored, interventionist foreign policy.

But many hardworking Americans’ gut reaction is wholly natural with less taxes and less handouts, though too many tunnel-visioned Republican voters still haven’t figured out that their solution is more of the exact same; the former never coming or the latter being robbed. A false choice of, as Dr. Ron Paul so simply puts it, a “warfare/welfare State”.

Unfortunately truly consistent and wholly ignored freedom-minded Patriots like Libertarian Party candidate in Delaware Jim Rash never even enter the conversation because people like Jim and local candidates like Jaime Brown and Rob McNealy trust you to make good decisions on your own and are marginalized in the mainstream media for it.

It doesn’t help that the voting system is rigged towards a political duopoly. As Colorado Libertarian for Governor Jaime Brown has gained wide-spread attention for advocating “approval voting”. He explained it best as “approving of all the candidates the voter approves of.” Eliminating the “lesser of the two evils” voter dilema.

There are normal people that believe in free-markets with real ideas that aren’t just regurgitated garbage from FoxNews and Mark Levin. People with ideas of non-coercion, it isn’t a crime unless it hurts someone, and sound money. And they are organized with ballot access and active Meetup.com groups.

Unfortunately, too many are still biting the left/right bullet and the Tea Party Express takes them for a mark, so expect more of the same.