The veep debate from a unique perspective: A vice presidential opponent

The following is a response to the October 2 vice presidential debate from Wayne Allyn Root, the Libertarian Party’s vice presidential candidate:

The Vice Presidential Debate from a Unique Perspective: A Vice Presidential Opponent
By Libertarian Vice Presidential Nominee Wayne Allyn Root

After watching the Vice Presidential debate tonight, I have several opinions to share. I have a rather unique perspective- I’m the “other guy” not in the debate. I am the Libertarian Party Vice Presidential nominee. Now I know why I wasn’t invited- the two parties are so much alike, having me on that stage would have exposed them as the fakes they are. There is so little difference between the 2 major political parties, it was painful to watch as they tried hard to look different. But I digress. First let me analyze the winners and losers. Then I’ll get to the good, bad and ugly.

As far as winners- the clear-cut winner was Governor Sarah Palin. First, because expectations were so set so low. She did a very credible job- one that far surpassed what was expected of her. Second, because the biased liberal media once again has proven its own worst enemy. The media tried so hard to create the impression of Palin as being unqualified and “out of her league,” that they made her the big underdog. Palin more than rose to the occasion. What the media fails to understand is that America loves an underdog. The more the media belittles Palin, the more America (especially middle America) will rise to her defense. Third, the intellectual elite of this country thinks far too much of themselves. The pompous, arrogant “Beltway Insiders” crowd thinks that no moose-hunting, hockey mom and beauty queen contestant from the University of Idaho can ever debate them on a national stage. To the contrary, middle America loves to see one of their own do battle (and win) versus an elite D.C. establishment-insider like Senator Joe Biden. Most Americans- if given a choice- will always root for a Sarah Palin over a member of the millionaire boys club.

Palin lacks the U.S. Senate pedigree, law degree, or the D.C. Beltway credentials of Biden, but she has Reaganesque-like charm, charisma and middle American values. She also has something that even a brash New Yorker like me appreciates- CHUTZPAH. Sarah, in an “aw shucks” kind of way, is more confident of a speaker and debater than any 5-term United States Senator. Like Reagan, she knows how to connect to her audience- soccer moms and NASCAR dads (or as she calls them “Joe Six Pack”).

More than any other politician in the country, I understand why McCain took the gamble of a lifetime to choose Sarah Palin. She is a female me! We’re both unusual non-traditional politicians. I speak often of being a small businessman, home-school dad, S.O.B. (son of a butcher) and citizen politician, from a far Western frontier state like Nevada- where we love guns and hate taxes. Sarah talks of being a small-town hockey mom who hunts, fishes and shoots moose, from a far West frontier state like Alaska- where they love guns and hate taxes. We both come from humble blue-collar beginnings- my dad was a butcher, my mom a homemaker. Her dad was a teacher, her mom a homemaker. We both speak often about our beliefs in smaller government and more power to the people. We are both family-oriented with long-lasting marriages and large families- Sarah has 5 children, including a new baby; my wife Debra and I have been blessed with 4 children, including a new baby. We’re both young, enthusiastic, and passionate spokespersons for our political causes. We both get our supporters pumped up with enthusiasm. We are both proud of our lack of connections to Washington D.C. and fancy-pants lawyers or lobbyists.

And we both have a signature line that ties into who we are and where we’re from- Sarah talks of the difference between hockey moms and pit bulls- lipstick. I talk of the big difference between my hometown Las Vegas and Washington D.C.- in Vegas the drunks gamble with their own money!

McCain sensed in the “Palin style” what I’ve understood for a long time: America is looking for a hero, an ANTI-POLITICIAN. Someone who is not a lawyer; not an elitist; not an intellectual; who understands middle America and small town values; who will govern with common sense; who wants to give the power back to the people- NOT the lobbyists and corporate interests. So I say BRAVO to Governor Palin for a job well done. You “get it” in a way so few politicians do (or ever have).

But that is where my compliments end. And that is also where our similarities end. You see Sarah is much like me when it comes to “style.” But when it comes to substance and reality, not so much (as Sarah would say). You see I’m the real thing. I’m a Barry Goldwater-loving, anti-government, anti-tax rebel who despises politicians, lawyers, lobbyists, government spending, earmarks, waste and corporate welfare.

Read my lips: I will NEVER in my lifetime support a tax increase- taxes are already far too high. I pledge to lower taxes, and oppose any attempt at a tax increase. How’s that for putting a bold promise in writing? Etch it in stone- I will NEVER support a tax increase. When it comes to spending, I join great fiscal conservatives like Barry Goldwater and Dr. Ron Paul in playing the role of “Dr. NO”- I pledge to oppose any and every spending increase that is not authorized by the constitution. Government spending is already far too high. I will only vote (and fight) to lower government spending.

Governor Palin is not an anti-politician. She’s been a politician for 13 years now. She is not against tax increases- she has in fact supported tax increases. She is not against earmarks- as Governor of Alaska she has requested more earmarks (per capita) than most any other Governor in America. She is not against government spending- while she did cut some spending out of the budget, she also signed the biggest budget in Alaska history into law. She was not against the Bridge to Nowhere- she was actually for it, before she was against it. After it was killed by public opinion, she actually kept the federal money allotted for the infamous bridge. And unlike me (a home-school dad)- she certainly is no fighter for parental freedom and school choice. To the contrary, she has publicly denounced vouchers in speeches in front of Alaska teachers unions. So it appears Sarah’s “citizen politician” image is just that- an image portrayed by a skilled actress.

The Vice Presidential debate was most shocking to me for what it exposed- a 2 party system that I call big and bigger, dumb and dumber. There was no smaller government candidate on that stage in St. Louis. There were only 2 big government supporters arguing over how big to make it. The party of Goldwater is long gone. Palin and her running mate McCain support the $700 billion bailout that socializes the U.S. banking system- just like Obama and Biden. Palin used every opportunity at the V.P. debate to denounce “greedy Wall Street” just like Biden and Obama (instead of strongly stating the truth- that it was corrupt and incompetent government that caused our economic and credit crisis). Palin supports more government regulation over Wall Street- just like Biden and Obama. Palin supports carbon caps- just like Obama and Biden. Palin agreed that mankind has caused some degree of global warming- just like Biden and Obama. Palin thinks the federal government should spend more money on failing public schools- just like Biden and Obama. No mention by Palin of failing public schools; greedy teachers unions; the need for choice and competition; or Democratic politicians being bought and paid for by teachers union contributions. Note that Goldwater supported an end to all federal meddling and spending on education. Reagan promised to terminate the entire Department of Education (although he never did). Palin proudly promised to spend more on education. Palin never mentioned one program or cabinet department she would cut. Not one. I have no doubt that Goldwater and Reagan were rolling over in their graves after this performance.

And when it comes to taxes, Palin simply says she wants to lower taxes, while the Democrats want to raise them. But she never clearly stated a detailed case for dramatically lower taxation or spending. She had no answer at all when Biden pointed out that McCain has supported tax increases hundreds of times. Is this what it has come to? Both sides arguing over who has supported tax increases the most? Is a conservative now the candidate who has supported tax increases only 120 times, instead of 400 times by the liberal Democrat?

And when it comes to war, Palin obviously supports ever-expanding military budgets (and taxation) to support more intervention and wars all over the world. There was not a mention by either candidate of cutting foreign aid, military bases or waste in the pentagon budget. Perhaps major contributions by defense contractors got in the way of that possible policy difference?

In the end, this debate proved the differences between the two major political parties to be small. Both Biden and Palin stand for bigger government- the only debate is over how big. With Biden (and Obama) it’s always just a little bigger. Palin was chosen by McCain to win back conservative and Libertarian votes. She is an actress playing a part: the part of Wayne Allyn Root- a fiscally conservative, anti-tax, Libertarian small businessperson and citizen politician from a Western state, that wants to restore common sense and give power back to the people.

Every 4 years Republicans pull the same charade- then they get elected and go back to bribing corporate interests and spending like drunken sailors (no offense intended towards drunken sailors). Democrats don’t even bother to hide what they stand for- higher taxes, bigger spending, bigger government, more power to teachers unions. Republicans just hide their true intensions much better. They run for election as small government Libertarians, then get elected and expand government to record levels. I call it “the November surprise”- they talk like Libertarians, then govern like liberals. Only now- after all the decades of promises broken- it should no longer come as a surprise. Having me on that stage would have exposed the 2-party system for the sham that it is. I now understand why I wasn’t invited to spoil the party. But boy would it have been fun!

Wayne Root is the Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee on the Libertarian Presidential ticket of Bob Barr/Wayne Root. His web site is: www.ROOTforAmerica.com.

25 Responses to “The veep debate from a unique perspective: A vice presidential opponent”

  1. Paul & Nader v Bailout! Says:

    Staged “debate” dance now ready for 24/7 consumption?
    Bailout Barack Obama w/partner Bailout John McCain.

    Full-spectrum media suppression/distortion
    target Ralph Nader and Ron Paul.

    Your vote is your power,
    they fear it, use it.

  2. Agent88 Says:

    A good analysis.

  3. Jason Says:

    Wrong, moron. Biden is not the elitist millionaire you make him out to be, and Palin is not the underdog hockey mom. Quit listening to Rush Limbaugh.

  4. Gabe N TX Says:

    WOW Jason! HE’S NOT AN ELITIST! Thanks for clearing that up for me! AND I WAS SO SURE THAT PALIN WAS THE UNDERDOG KUDOS TO YOU FOR RESEARCHING THAT FOR ALL OF US MORONS! Where’d you find all them gosh darn facts! You should find out where you found’em, and get back to me with’em!

  5. MPM Says:

    Wow both of them looked so horrible in the debate I don’t see how anyone watching it wouldn’t consider a third party vote.

  6. Libertarian in Louisiana Says:

    Did you miss Palin’s response to the one true constitutional question

    Geez, Palin said she agreed with Cheney’s analysis of the “vagueness” and “expansiveness” that might be read into the vice president’s authority under the Constitution! It was the democrat, Biden, who gave the constitutional response (And, this is one registered Libertarian that agrees with Biden that Cheney will go down in history as one of the most dangerous vice presidents of all time!)

    And, on top of that, while Palin is admittedly charismatic and charming, she is not very bright. . .

  7. Don Patterson Says:

    Good piece, Wayne.

    ‘Wish you had been there.

    Don Patterson
    Libertarian Candidate for Congress

  8. Joe Buchman Says:

    Wayne,

    Had you been in this debate, the ratings would have been even higher, and more than double or triple the live event for the replays as word-of-mouth would have spread about your performance, views and presentation, unlike the other two, of HONEST facts.

    I would have loved to have seen it.

    While sometimes, like in the Denver debate, or even the reception in your home at Freedom Fest, you come across as overwhelming and too brash for my personal taste,

    I LOVE YOUR ENERGY, PASSION and what I hope will prove to be long-term demonstrated commitment to Libertarian Principles of Freedom and non (initiation of) violence.

    Joe Buchman
    Libertarian Candidate for Congress, Utah’s First District
    www.buchmanforcongress.com

    PS What do you know about Macau? I’m off to Zhuhai to spend 2 months teaching in an all-English language Business school there right after the election till Jan 10th. Would love to have you guest lecture in my Media Planning and Business Ethics classes if you can get over there. The Venitian in Macau is three times bigger than the one in Vegas! And Macau is on track to be bigger than Vegas within the next 10 years. Wondering what your insights are into all of that?

  9. Mariobox Says:

    I saw the debate for a couple of minute up until I realized how the debate was going nowhere. Sarah Palin is annoying and her answers were not clear. I liked her when she first came out as the VP candidate, but not anymore.

    Joe Biden won this debate and Sarah Palin is just going into the last three minutes of her five minutes of fame.

    Barr/Root all the way!

  10. DebbieKat Says:

    Ugh. I stopped reading not long after you said Palin won. Most of the time, she didn’t even come close to answering the question the moderator asked. She didn’t even bother to explain how McCain’s health care tax credit would help or hinder people. Her response after Biden related his personal experience as a single dad and having a child that might not make it was so out of place and callous. She didn’t win anything in this debate. She memorized her talking points well though. And it seems WAR has memorized some Republican talking points as well…

    liberally-biased media? That’s a Faux news fallacy. Intellectual elite? I never knew that it was such a bad thing to be EDUCATED! Since when do we glorify being ignorant and uneducated in this country? When did this happen? Underdog hockey mom…? Is that the kind of potential vp that we want to have meeting with world leaders????! Please don’t encourage this. Your statement that Americans will support the underdog doesn’t qualify for someone who is SO unqualified for this position. She is completely out of her league. I know there are a lot of stupid Americans out there. After all, there are still people out there that support Bush’s policies despite all the wrath they have brought on us globally and financially, and I’m not a “middle America” type, but I would hope there are some signs of intelligent life out there that would agree that Palin is just not qualified.

  11. Chuck Moulton Says:

    Great analysis!

  12. Rob Says:

    I hate to say it but if an article is going to be this long, at least make it intellectually interesting.

    I stopped reading it. But… doesn’t matter, I’m glad that Root is on the ticket and kudos to Barr and Root for going out there everyday and trying to get the word out.

  13. Robert Capozzi Says:

    Root is right to point out that the “theater” and “life stories” aspects of the VP debates (and politics generally) drive the process as much as anything.

    And, yes, Palin positions herself as an “anti-politician.” However, she’s NOT an anti-politician. She’s governor of the largest state in the Union.

    My take is that Ls need to learn from this. Rather than being anti-politicians, we need to evolve toward being anti-politics politicians. If we actually want to have influence, we must get into the actual arena, even if our intent is to undo the arena!

    Otherwise, we will continue to be pure theorists of no consequence. Barr/Root is a step in that direction. We do need to develop a lot of bench strength.

    Liberty is too important to just let the Rs and Ds keep taking it away from us.

  14. Clark Says:

    ...republicrat root still uses the stooooooooopid ‘liberal/conservative,’ left/right, etcetercrap, dichotomy..

    ...he still mentions republican fuck-heads like goldwater (a murderous vietnam war supporter) and stinking ronald reagan (an ignorant big government shill and phony) with fondness..

    ...i wish all you phony republican ‘Libertarians’ would PLEASE go back home to your stinking fucking republican party and stop besmirching honest libertarianism!..

    ...but have a good day!..

  15. Jonathan Says:

    STOP with your all mighty better than you attitude Clark
    http://www.nolanchart.com/article5004.html

  16. Derek Says:

    Look at this idea I had the other day. We have the following candidates on enough ballots to hypothetically win an Electoral College majority: Barr, Baldwin, Nader and McKinney. The CPD has 4 debates, 1 for VP candidates and 3 for Presidential candidates. So, have a third party debate where the winner gets to debate in the 1st debate, the winner’s running mate gets to debate in the VP debate, the runner-up gets to participate in the 2nd debate and the candidate that comes in 3rd gets to participate in the final Presidential debate. Or else we can have the following: first debate, all candidates on enough ballots to win an Electoral College majority; second debate, all candidates that have 5% nationwide or a majority of voter’s support; third debate, all candidates that have 15% or more nationwide.

  17. David D.... Says:

    I second that emotion Mr. Root! I hated to hear what had been done to you by your running mate in a cornering of Congressman Paul, but that is what it is. Sounds like to me though as I read your statement you need to come on over yourself to the Constitution Party. Because I thought libratarians were for liberal government higher taxes, expansive government, entitlement, etc. etc. As I read your release I see a Constitutionalist, think your in the wrong party sir, c’mon over the water’s fine!!

  18. Thom Simmons Says:

    I think you hit the nail on the head. For the last 12 or so years, have actually been very tempted to vote Democratic - and in every case, before election day, the Democrats managed to push me back to the GOP with their condescending, elitist, anti-Joe Six Pack disdain.

  19. Clark Says:

    DAVID DUMBASS BLURTS: “Because I thought libratarians (sic) were for liberal government higher taxes, expansive government, entitlement, etc. etc.

    ...actually dumbass, generally, ‘the con. party’ supports HUGE ‘government’ in comparison to ‘the LP!’..and please do take root, barr, jonathong, and the rest of the republicant posers and numb fucks galore!..

    ...btw, i know some of you ‘Libertarian free-marketeer$’ (and other republicrat dopes who work their holes as to illion$ absent an honest inkling as to the origin, nature, etc. of even one!) probably won’t like this…but here is what the world’s foremost monetary historian/thinker has to say about the recent ‘bailout’...(btw, if you know of a better monetary historian/thinker please merely name the name or spare me the open hole noise!)..i will just about GUARANTEE THAT NONE OF YOU HERE WANT TO HONESTLY DEBATE THIS GUY AS TO “MONEY”...THE LONGER THE DEBATE THE MORE THOROUGH YOUR TROUNCING!..

    http://www.monetary.org/700billionscam.html

    “Monetary Reform of the Federal Reserve System.

    At the heart of the problem is that our money system has been privatized. Naturally it’s being run for the benefit of the “privates” in control, with minimal concern for the public interest..

    First all the elements of the Monetary Transparency Act should be a stipulated part of the rescue in a section calling for greater transparency. A section can be added for an arm to investigate monetary crimes…

    Second, rather than borrowing the $700 billion being demanded, and ending up paying back about 3 times that amount after interest charges, The US Government could issue the money the same way the banks do, instead of borrowing it from them. But while the banks issue credit that substitutes for money, the U.S. would issue actual money. Our Government has the power to create the money, in an account, or by simply printing it as “greenbacks.”

    There would not be inflationary effects, because it was already believed that those moneys existed in the form of the real estate values and loans. In effect this would stop a deflation which would follow from writing down those assets and loans to their present market values. Some conditions would be needed to assure that the banking system did not use those greenback dollars for further credit creation, as that would be inflationary. In essence the greenbacks would not be “re-discountable” by the banking system to create more loans, but would be legal tender for all debts public and private…

    Legislation called The American Monetary Act has been in preparation for years. It’s based on well known monetary principles and actual experience from our own, and other countries monetary history.

    The Act incorporates the Federal Reserve System into the U.S. Treasury. It removes the banking systems privilege to create money, placing that firmly within government, and it establishes areas for governmentally created money to be introduced into the economy for infrastructure…

    The monetary system will shift away from credit and debt, to real money. One difference between money and credit is that during uncertain times, credit evaporates, but money does not go out of existence, it is much more stable.

    The AMI has been ready and working on these provisions for years, while realizing that it unfortunately might require a crisis to bring real attention to it. We have the crisis. Let’s make this happen. Let’s get real reform that helps bring humanity forward, out of the ignorance and poverty and warfare, and darkness; and into the light.

    What the administrations proposal is doing is almost identical to what Keynes did during the Great Depression. He insisted that the bailout be in terms of government going into more debt to the banking system, whereas the Chicago Plan by the greatest economists in the nation at that time, was promoting the government to create money (Greenback equivalants) instead of debt.
    (See http://www.monetary.org/chicagoplan.html describing Chicago Plan and Keynes)
    Whats that line about repeating actions and expecting a different result?

    Keynes won the argument but his program did not work and it was only WW2 and the wartime employment, creating tanks to be blown up, airplanes to be shot out of the sky, and ships to be sunk, that Americans went back to work and we worked our way out of the depression, and into more debt. Thats where this proposal leads. Keynes answer was that “in the long run we are all dead,” but not our posterity. Based on what happened following his program before, our descendants, and society that survives become enslaved. (Bob Poteat is presenting a talk on Keynes and Militarism at our conference.)

    Serfdom will result, unless we begin putting a stop to the monetary enslavement now.

    From a previous post some years back on an IMF Bailout:
    “The corporate attempt to be bailed out of their errors, in the same year that they have agitated to cut welfare benefits to the truly needy, is despicable. Their attempt to have the same American workers they are attacking, bail out their corporate greed and stupidity shows the complete bankruptcy of their philosophy, as well as their management methods, and the depravity of their soul-less existence. Lobbying furtively for assistance from the government they continually denigrate as impotent, attests to the unfathomable depth of their hypocrisy…’

  20. Clark Says:

    ..as one wag put it, “these republicrat dipshits ‘make public’ things that ought to be private—the sex lives of celebrities, etceterot ad goddamned nauseam—and ‘make private’ things that are truly public, like the administration of the very fucking ‘money’ they grovel to acquire!..

    ....(it appears these brainwashed republicrat herd animals have some strange fucking ooga booga priorities!)

    ..but have a good day!..

  21. Clark Says:

    ...please substitute ‘creation/issuance’ for ‘administration’ in my last rant..

  22. DIAMOND DAVE Says:

    The minute CLARK started his post by saying “DAVID DUMBASS BLURTS” he lost me and he doesn’t realize looses all credibility

  23. Clark Says:

    ...and DUMBASS DIAMIOND DAVE, to me, anyone who can’t distinguish between ‘loose’ and ‘lose’ seems a good candidate as an incredible fucking idiot!...

    ...but have a good day!..

  24. disinter Says:

    Clark rules.

  25. marcparella Says:

    “You see I’m the real thing. I’m a Barry Goldwater-loving, anti-government, anti-tax rebel who despises politicians, lawyers, lobbyists, government spending, earmarks, waste and corporate welfare.”—Got to love that.

    As a person who grew up in Phoenix, yea… the old man was great!

Leave a Reply