So, the Iowa Caucuses have come and gone, and it appears that voters in Iowa prefer force placed on them instead of freedom.
Iowans voted for a man who would force all employers to pay for our health care or be forced to contribute toward a national health insurance plan that the rest of us will be forced to pay for through higher taxation as well.
This is regardless of the fact that an amendment in the Constitution says powers not listed in the Constitution are granted to the states or the people (10th Amendment). Health care of the people is not listed in the Constitution as a responsibility of the federal government. Therefore, health care is a state or individual issue (which can open the door for multiple possibilities).
Not only does Obama ignore the Constitution (or doesn't know it), he sets an example of force instead of freedom in a free country.
Iowans also voted for a man who would push for a Constitutional amendment that bans marriage and all of the legal rights associated with marriage from certain people based on their chosen sexuality, while continuing to grant such rights in marriage to people who choose a different sexuality, essentially dictating what kind of sexuality we should all have.
This is regardless of the fact that an amendment already exists in the Constitution which forbids creating new amendments that deny rights to some while are granted to others (9th Amendment).
Not only does Huckabee ignore the Constitution (or doesn't know it), he sets an example of force instead of freedom in a free country.
In Iowa, such force is perfectly fine, if that's what they want (freedom provides that). But the rest of the country is not Iowa.
Don't get me wrong, Obama and Huckabee have their good points. Obama wants to move past partisan politics. Huckabee wants to eliminate the income tax. These things can be good for freedom, if done properly (no cherry picking of partisanship to move past and no replacement of one tax for another).
But why vote for a candidate who has good traits when they also have bad traits that weigh just as heavily, if not more? Are traits that abuse freedom in a free country traits worth ignoring?
All of this is regardless of the fact that there exists a candidate who knows what the Constitution says and who sets an example of freedom instead of force - the kind of freedom that would allow the kind of force Iowans want in a state that wanted it, so long as it stayed within that state instead of expanding across the entire country.
That candidate is Ron Paul.
Here's to hoping that voters in New Hampshire do a better job of taking care of our national freedom.