"Then what is freedom? It is the will to be responsible to ourselves." ~ Friedrich Nietzsche
So What Else Is Happening in Massachusetts?
Column by Scott Lazarowitz.
Exclusive to STR
There are other things happening in Massachusetts, besides the Boston Marathon bombings and subsequent illegal martial law in Watertown.
We really need someone to partner with Chief Fullabull Elizabeth Warren in Washington, don’t we?
The Democrat candidates in the primary were U.S. Reps. Steve Lynch and Ed Markey. Markey won the nomination with 57% of the vote.
Ed Malarkey is the far-left moonbat known for his love of “Cap-n-Trade,” regardless how carbon taxes or other energy- and environment-related intrusions make us all less free, less prosperous, less secure and are really just counter-productive. (Obviously, there are far sounder ways to protect the environment and our liberty at the same time, by the way.)
The losing Democrat candidate in the special election primary, Steve Lynch, is the one Massachusetts Democrat in Congress who voted against ObamaCare. Supposedly, some conservatives – yes, there are one or two here – stated that they took a Democrat ballot and voted for Lynch “because he voted against ObamaCare.”
However, what the conservative dupes don’t seem to understand is why Democrat Lynch voted against ObamaCare – because it didn’t have a “public option.” Lynch wants the government to participate in providing insurance as a competitor with private insurance companies. As many readers already know, when the government provides people with a “competitive” alternative, the private insurers will be run out of business. This “public option” plan is really the sneaky way for politicians to eventually get their “single payer” plan that they really want – complete government control over everybody’s health and medical matters, whether we like it or not. (That really worked in the Soviet Union, for sure.)
On the Republican side, former Navy SEAL, Obama campaign contributor and political hack wannabe Gabriel Gomez won that party’s nomination with 51% against former U.S. attorney Mike Sullivan and former Romney legal counsel Dan Winslow.
I am hearing in the news that political newcomer Gomez will be supported by the national GOP (The “Grand Old Progressives”), despite Gomez’s supporting and donating to Obama’s presidential campaigns, and Gomez’s support for gun control and same-sex marriage.
So, as with the Democrats, the senile old GOP really like their political power, and they will support anything (anything but principle, that is) as long as they stay in control.
And Gomez has said that he, like Scott Brown, will “reach across the aisle.” Ah yes. He’s a “Bipartisan Consensus” kind of guy. That Bipartisanship thing has really worked throughout history, hasn’t it?
Anyway, I’m sure you can see just how useful these primaries and elections really are, year after year, decade after decade.
And speaking of former U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, did he run in the special election? Nope.
Apparently the longtime GOP hack has been visiting New Hampshire and is considering running for U.S. Senate against incumbent N.H. Democrat Sen. Jeanne Shaheen in 2014.
Now, this Scott Brown person is the guy who throughout his previous campaigns for U.S. Senate bragged about how he was the only candidate in the race who was born and raised in Massachusetts and has spent his whole life here, and was devoted to the people of Massachusetts. But apparently he has been bitten by the “political bug,” and is anguished over his loss of power he had in the U.S. Senate. (Yech!)
And after this special election, there is another election in 2014 for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, the regularly scheduled election at the conclusion of John Kerry’s six-year term. But will Scott Brown consider running in that election? Uh-uh. Could he possibly win such an election? Uh-uh. As stated above, he will have to switch to the Democrat Party to win something in this People’s Republic now.
But does it really matter who wins in this special election, or next year’s elections, in Massachusetts or any other state? Of course not! These politicians are all the same – they’re statists. They love political power, and, frankly, most of them have been going through life as professional politicians, government bureaucrats, or government-subsidized lawyers, lobbyists or corporatists, so to hell with them!
In other words, most of these pols have been living a life of political enrichment and empowerment, as opposed to the “economic means,” as the German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer would call it. The difference is that some people use the political means of State power and authority to impose aggression against others to get what they want, while others use the economic means of peaceful, free productivity and exchange with the absence of aggression.
So, no, it doesn’t matter who replaces John Forbes Heinz Kerry in the U.S. Senate. We would be better off if that remained an empty seat. And the same goes for all the other seats as well.
In fact, we would all be better off if Congress would just adjourn and go home permanently, and take all those damn laws, special interest-favoring policies, tax-thefts, regulations and intrusions with them.
So, just what good have these politicians and bureaucrats actually done for America?
They should all be fired, and not replaced!
And the same goes for the states and locals as well!
Just imagine the freedom – and prosperity – we would have without them and their bureaucratic intrusions. People would be free to associate with their doctors and it would be kept private. People could start businesses in any field without having to ask for some parasite’s permission, and work without having their earnings stolen from them and their labor enslaved by non-productive racketeers, banksters and hooligans. Law and order would actually be restored by the people whose main means of security and protection would be theirs to choose, with no restrictions. No dependence on “law enforcement,” as “law enforcement” is no longer dependable.
And by the way, speaking of the police state in Watertown following the Boston Marathon bombings and police ordering residents to leave their own homes while police illegally search them: Whatever happened to “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects”?
But how secure are you in your person, house, papers and effects with police in your home while you are not there to supervise them? Because not only are government police not dependable, they are also extremely untrustworthy! If we got rid of the inherently corrupting “law enforcement” socialism that we have now, we would be much better off. But I digress.
Anyway, in recent Massachusetts electoral races, the most recent candidate promoting liberty was the young Joe Kennedy (not the current Joe Kennedy who replaced Barney Frank but the other one who is of no relation to “The Kennedys”).
The other young Joe Kennedy ran against Scott Brown and Martha Coakley in the 2010 senatorial special election to replace the late U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy.
And prior to that “not-a-Kennedy” Joe Kennedy, we had Libertarian Carla Howell who ran for governor against Willard Romney and some also-rans in 2002. Carla is now the executive director of the national Libertarian Party. Who knows why, as the LP hasn’t really made much progress since it began 40 years ago, and they have been what some people would call “statist lite.” Sadly, the “Party of Principle” has not been as principled as one would like.
But people who want their freedom restored must realize that politics and government are not the answers to our problems. They are the causes of our problems. If people don’t understand that, then perhaps they should read the aforementioned Oppenheimer, and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and Murray Rothbard as well, to name just a few.
So, regarding the upcoming special election to replace John Kerry, it would be best for the people of Massachusetts to just sit this one out.
And every other election as well, as a vote for anyone is a vote for the evil State and against your life and your freedom.