THE CHOICE

Posted at 8:34 a.m. ET

Peter Robinson, who was a speechwriter for President Reagan, paints a clear picture of what we have in store for us if, as they say, present polling trends continue.  His is one of several articles I've seen in the last few days, each well written, that doesn't hesitate to show deep concern for what is ahead.  Writing in Forbes, and reflecting the words and ideas of the great Thomas Sowell, Robinson says:

Sowell calls one worldview the "constrained vision." It sees human nature as flawed or fallen, seeking to make the best of the possibilities that exist within that constraint. The competing worldview, which Sowell terms the "unconstrained vision," instead sees human nature as capable of continual improvement.

And...

The American Revolution embodied the constrained vision. "In the United States," Sowell says, "it was assumed from the outset that what you needed to do above all was minimize [the damage that could be done by] the flaws in human nature." The founders did so by composing a constitution of checks and balances. More than two centuries later, their work remains in place.

The French Revolution, by contrast, embodied the unconstrained vision. "In France," Sowell says, "the idea was that if you put the right people in charge--if you had a political Messiah--then problems would just go away." The result? The Terror, Napoleon and so many decades of instability that France finally sorted itself out only when Charles de Gaulle declared the Fifth Republic.

And...

Sen. John McCain, who is trailing, has by and large embraced the constrained vision; Sen. Barack Obama, who is leading, the unconstrained vision...

...Whereas McCain has promised to nominate justices "who have a history of strict adherence to the constitution," Obama has said instead that if "someone is being treated unfairly, then the Court has to stand up if nobody else will, and that is the kind of judge I want."

And the result of this?

"Only once you got into the courtroom, in front of the judge," Sowell says, "would you finally learn what the law was. You would have no clue beforehand." We would become less and less a nation of laws, more and more a nation ruled by nine men and women in robes.

And on foreign policy?

"Barack Obama," Sowell says, "has a lot more faith in verbal interactions than I would. What he is proposing under the guise of change is what was tried between the two world wars and failed disastrously." Accommodation, diplomatic overtures, talk. It failed seven decades ago. It would fail today.

No mincing of the vocabulary there. 

Take it all together, Sowell believes, and this election will prove decisive.

"There is such a thing as a point of no return," he says. If Obama wins the White House and Democrats expand their majorities in the House and Senate, they will intervene in the economy and redistribute wealth. Yet their economic policies "will pale by comparison to what they will do in permitting countries to acquire nuclear weapons and turn them over to terrorists. Once that happens, we're at the point of no return. The next generation will live under that threat as far out as the eye can see."

Finally...

"The unconstrained vision is really an elitist vision," Sowell explains. "This man [Obama] really does believe that he can change the world. And people like that are infinitely more dangerous than mere crooked politicians."

It is rare, though, to find discussions like this in the mass media, which is far more interested in Sarah Palin's clothing allowance or any signs of John McCain's age.  Had the facts been explained to the American people, or even hinted at, it's quite possible we'd be going in a different political direction.

October 24, 2008.