Obama the Kakistocrat

Francis Fukuyama is still alive, so it’s impossible that Barack Obama is his reincarnation. Fukuyama — in a 1989 essay and again in his famous 1992 book — proclaimed the end of history. His contention is that capitalist liberal democracy is the endpoint of history, the final evolution of government and man.

Barack Obama promises a “post-partisan” — really post-political — government. In the Democratic national radio address Saturday he said, “If you give me your vote on Tuesday, we won’t just win this election — together, we will change this country and change the world.”

Ten months ago, Obama said he could deliver change by building a post-partisan coalition: “I think the American people are hungry for something different and can be mobilized around big changes, not incremental changes, not small changes,” according to a Washington Post report. Obama added, “I think that there are a whole host of Republicans, and certainly independents, who have lost trust in their government, who don’t believe anybody is listening to them, who are staggering under rising costs of health care, college education, don’t believe what politicians say. And we can draw those independents and some Republicans into a working coalition, a working majority for change.”

We know the well-intentioned Fukuyama believed his proposition, though history has already proved him wrong. (See, e.g., bin Laden, Usama, Putin, Vladimir et al.) History will continue as long as mankind inhabits the earth.

History is just politics viewed through the lens of time. The less well-intentioned Obama, from every indication, plans an historic liberal kakistocracy aimed at fundamentally changing our society.

Kakistocracy — a term we know only because Bill Buckley taught it to us about three decades ago — means government by all the worst people. His politics and his actions are retrograde, not “progressive.” By all reports, his cabinet will be comprised of retread Clintonites, liberals drawn from Congress and young liberals as inexperienced as he.

We know Obama wants to spend another $800 billion on all the liberal boondoggles he’s mentioned, from “tax cuts” for people who don’t pay taxes — effectively another federal welfare program — to job-creation for five million “green jobs”, i.e., those that reduce “global warming.” And his post-partisanship is really a promise to end political debate with those more conservative than he. Which comprises everyone to the right of

Consider these few examples. They aren’t a dispositive list, but they do illuminate the meaning of Obama’s “post-partisan” approach.

Obama, like most liberals, is intolerant of dissent. Last week, his campaign kicked three newspaper reporters off his campaign plane. They were from the Washington Times, the New York Post and the Dallas Morning News. Obama’s campaign contends that it is a coincidence that all three papers had endorsed John McCain.

In a November 1 editorial, the Washington Times gave the lie to that contention, documenting the history of retaliation against reporters, newspapers, radio and television stations that had had the temerity to ask Obama or Biden tough questions. Obama’s “post-partisanship” will — to the press — be “post-First Amendment.” Conservative media will be ignored entirely and anyone who asks tough questions will be shunned and unanswered. But that is only the beginning.

According to an Associated Press report last week, Obama has approached Cong. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) about possibly serving as the White House chief of staff. Emanuel — nicknamed “Rahmbo” for his hyper-partisan tactics — is a very close friend of David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign strategist. According to a Newsweek report, Emanuel “grew up, somewhat weirdly, to study ballet and practice Chicago politics.” He once sent a dead fish to a pollster who displeased him. If Obama is elected, this may be the man who conducts the liberal orchestra for Obama’s “post-partisan” administration.

Tomorrow we will go to the polls. This great national nightmare — this ceaseless, all-consuming campaign — will finally, finally be over after we suffer tonight the final annoyance of interviews with both candidates replacing the far more informative half-time show on Monday Night Football.

The great Robert Novak, shortly after I first met him, told me that the choice of a president is as personal a choice as any American makes. Novak’s wisdom is not to be denied. When voters go behind the curtain to cast their ballots they are affected by everything from peer pressure to the latest campaign ad they saw, but their choice is intensely personal.

In a radio interview with Gov. Mitt Romney last week, we agreed that anyone who could figure out what is the question most on Americans’ minds at that moment could win the election.

I don’t know what you will be thinking about, but there are several issues that will be on my mind tomorrow.

First and foremost is the fact that we are in an existential war. It’s not like Vietnam. After Vietnam we came home, and aside from the national malaise Jimmy Carter celebrated, our way of life was unchanged. If we lose this war — one war, not many, against the ideology of radical Islam and its adherents — we lose our freedom and our way of life. Barack Obama is naïve, Joe Biden bearing the weight of more than three decades of being wrong on foreign policy. They cannot be trusted to win this war.

Second, our economy is in serious trouble. Thanks to the Bush-Paulson plan, we have nationalized a huge part of our financial markets. We need a president who will devise and implement the means to restore economic freedom. Barack Obama said yesterday that his first priority would be a second “stimulus” package for the economy, including his “tax cuts” for the middle class. The money for that will, of course, have to be printed or borrowed. Obama will diminish economic freedom, retreating into protectionism and — through the infamous card check bill, business taxes and protectionism — sink us from recession to depression.

Third, in partnership with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Obama will make every liberal pipe dream the law of the land. Liberals appointed to the Supreme Court, amnesty for illegal immigrants, preclusion of any limits on abortion, the “Fairness Doctrine” to silence conservative talk radio, gays serving openly in the military, and more. Much more.

All the latest polls show that the odds against John McCain winning the race are quite small. As Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, said yesterday, “We do not have to pull an inside straight.” As a former naval aviator, John McCain surely knows that the term is “fill an inside straight,” but that doesn’t reduce the odds against him.

With those things foremost in my mind, I’ll vote for John McCain tomorrow.