Liberty or tyranny: which is it to be?

Liberty or tyranny: which is it to be?

Theatrics obscures the real issues in this year's presidential contest, which are quite serious—even existential.

The media circus stated by Donald Trump this past week sought to obscure the Cruz victory in the Iowa caucuses on Tuesday. It’s done more than that, however: it has taken the focus off the serious issues that face this country and put it back on superficialities and personalities.

Shame on the press for leading the charge. That charge continues in New Hampshire.

In the view of the mostly left-wing media, the process of choosing a president is a game. Consider the words they invariably use to describe it: contest, race, matchup. Who’s ahead in the polls? The race is neck-and-neck. A candidate is “tacking” to the center.

The sports analogies abound. Ted Cruz called them out during one debate by saying the press was encouraging a cage match.

Even a debate is a contest.

So if the decision as to who will be our next president is a contest, what is the state of play leading into the New Hampshire primary?

On the Republican side, Trump is trying to regain the idea that he is really the front runner—another sports-inspired term—by casting doubt on Cruz’s Iowa victory. His trumped-up charges of cheating in Iowa are groundless but the press, always willing to dump on Republicans, have lapped it up and amplified it.

If the presidential contest is a game, then the game is really King of the Hill.

In the kid’s game, you claw your way to the top and once there, stomp on everyone else trying to take you down.

Politics is a lot like that.

Trump channeled the anger of the country to get to the top and his goal now is to stomp anyone getting close. That’s Cruz and Rubio. The press loves it. They’ve taken a sudden liking to Rubio in third place, seeking to propel him past Cruz.

A three-way race, neck-in-neck is far more exciting. It generates more page views, brings in more revenue—and distracts from the real issues.

The three Republican governors in the race haven’t been silent, either. In an interview with Fox’s Megyn Kelly, Jeb Bush contrasted “the governors” with “the senators.” Looks like the Bush and Christie campaigns are trying to claw their up from the bottom of the hill by tugging on Rubio.

On the Democratic side the contest is a bit different—and weirder. With O’Malley dropping out, the two socialists left in the game are trying to out-do each other to see who’s the most radical redistributionist. The party that claims to be “of the people” and for diversity and inclusion can only find two rich old white people to represent them, one an unindicted felon.

All the diversity of thought and of ethnicity are on the Republican side.

All of this obscures the very serious issues that face this nation.

The big question facing voters in the fall is this: Will the United States return to its Constitutional roots and be a nation of laws or will it continue down the road to socialist serfdom and the rule of the strong man?

After seven years of fighting the fundamental transformation of America, the prospects are scary.

The scales are weighted on the side of tyranny.

The election of either Sanders or Clinton would end the Republic as we know it. The Roman Emperors ruled in the name of the People and Senate of Rome; these socialists would rule in the name of the Constitution and the People. But like emperors, it would be in name only.

At the top of the other party at present stands Trump. He will not reduce the size or scope of the federal government. People believe he will use his powers for good, not for evil. That’s the meme, but the result would be a tyranny of the right.

The three governors are also-rans. There is so little popular support for them, one wonders why they’re still in the race. The real hopes of the governor class, Walker and Perry, dropped out a long time ago.

Who stands for liberty and the Constitution?

The three senator we elected since 2010 that have become the face of the liberty movement in the Senate.

Unfortunately, Rand Paul dropped out this week. He was perhaps liberty’s best candidate, especially in terms of civil liberties but also in terms of a reasoned foreign policy. That leaves just Cruz and Rubio.

Rubio is highly suspect for his pro-amnesty stand on the Gang of Eight bill. What else has he accomplished? Even though Santorum endorsed him, Santorum couldn’t name any.

That leaves freshman senator Ted Cruz as liberty’s sole champion, just as freshman senator Barack Obama has become its greatest enemy.

Americans will have to get past the circus being offered up to us and decide the serious question of what kind of country we want to be.

This fall, We the People either vote to restore our liberties or to surrender them.