Has Obama peaked?

Generally, my orientation is libertarian (although I have little in common with the Libertarian Party). I believe that government has two overriding roles to play: national defense and police protection of individual rights. I also believe that government needs to provide some measure of "safety net" to protect the worst-off in society, although I hate "cliff" benefits, even though they are the cheapest form of benefit, because I don't believe they provide individuals with enough incentive to improve their lives.

As a libertarian, I've tended to vote Republican since the Reagan realignment, although I voted Democratic in three straight Presidential elections (1988-1996) when the Republican candidate was either Bush 41 (who clearly didn't believe in libertarianism) or Dole (who was about as energetic as a sack of potatoes; it didn't come as any surprise that he needs Viagra in the bedroom).

However, for libertarians, the Bush 43 presidency -- especially its second term -- has been an unmitigated disaster. The libertarian view that people should be free to make their own social arrangements, extending even to child-bearing and marriage, has been hammered into the ground by Bush's commitment to terminating legal abortion and blocking gay marriage. The libertarian belief in minimal growth in federal government has been tossed aside in the rush to break spending records, to fund "bridges to nowhere" and to federalize local programs like education. Meanwhile, loose regulation of the economy was often replaced by no regulation, creating a perfect environment for frauds and con men, who seem to have been major instigators of the current mortgage crisis. And the secular libertarian approach to governing was replaced with a religious overview that was no less divisive for being sincere.

Basically, the Bushies wanted to regulate areas that libertarians would normally prefer to see left to individual choice and ignore areas where regulation is seen as necessary, leading Bush 43 to the well-deserved lowest approval ratings for a president since the advent of scientific polling. Even people like Dick Cheney, known to be a supporter of gay marriage, had to sublimate their views to the Bush-beating of individual rights. For Pete's sake, the U.S. engaged in torture. Torture! It may be an effective way to get information, but we Americans have always prided ourselves on the fact that, unlike some totalitarian regimes, torture was something that Americans didn't resort to. We can't say that any more.

In the run-up to the 2008 election, then, it was clear that from a libertarian perspective, the Bushies had to go. Unfortunately, most of the Republican candidates were proud of Bush's anti-libertarian acts and pledged to continue them, or even expand them. There were only a couple of Republicans who promised a break with the Bush lineage.

Against that backdrop, I had to look at the Democratic candidates seriously. The Democratic front-runner was Hillary Clinton, who does a passable imitation of the libertarian version of Satan without even trying. She basically supports a huge expansion of government. The other candidates, who looked like the Seven Dwarves compared to Snow White (Hillary), had little chance. But one of them stood out from the beginning.

Barack Obama (who now prefers to go by his Africanized first name instead of his European nickname of Barry) was the candidate of one of the "fringiest" of Democratic fringe groups, the leftist radicals that make up MoveOn.org. Ordinarily, no libertarian would consider any candidate endorsed by these big-government radicals. But Barack Obama was different from the beginning. He was extremely well-spoken, certainly the best speaker among the Presidential candidates since JFK and Reagan. Many of his speeches, like Bush 43's campaign speeches, were little more that platitudes about changing the way Washington does business -- which Bush 43 utterly failed at and quickly gave up.

A well-spoken presidential candidate is useless without something to say. If all Barack Obama had to say was to spout the tired radicalisms of the MoveOn crowd, his campaign might have succeeded among Democrats, but it would have had no appeal to someone like me. Instead, Obama came across as a serious and thoughtful candidate.