Going 'Backward' Sylvia Bokor During elections, Democrats routinely claim that "Republicans want to go backwar d," implying

that Republicans want to return to some drearily boring, less prospe rous time. Obama resurrected that bromide in a campaign speech several days before the Demo crat National Convention. Unsurprisingly, it was the Convention's theme, pounded on by every speaker. For instance, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley invited the mob to chant the slogan "Forward, Not Back" as the delegates waved signs printed with the same message. The high point of such repetitiveness was former Michigan Governor Jennifer Gran holm's speech, which took the claim to new depths of rabble-rousing: "America, l et's rev our engines!" she yelled from the podium. "In your car and on your ballo t, the 'D' is for drive forward, and the 'R' is for reverse and in this election , we're driving forward, not back!" This unsubtle play on the initials of the two major political parties brought down the house. Ms. Granholm's analogy starkly reveals that leftists have taken over the Democra t party. Leftists see government, not the private sector, as the engine of the ec onomy, which explains their blindness to what economic activity requires. They se e government officials as the engine's drivers, which explains their evasion of the kind of road that will result from their looting the earner to give to the n on-earner, of hamstringing "the rich" to support the malingerer. Since the Democrat Convention, the claim that Democrats want to go "Forward" and that Republicans want "to go backward" has been repeated ad nauseam. The New Yor k Times published Obama's "I want" convention speech, which included the asserti on that Obama wants "to take the nation forward but the Republicans want to take us backwards." The Huffington Post reported that North Dakota Democrats criticized the state's Republicans, asking whether their leadership would "move us forward." Included wa s Obama's claim that "Mitt Romney wants to take us back with tax cuts to the wea lthiest." Of the Repulicans,Hrafnkell Haraldsson wrote, "And you thought it was crazy to ti me travel back to the time of dinosaurs!" Indeed, the screams that Democrats want "to go Forward" but Republicans "want to go back" have been broadcast with Marie Antoinette-like extravagance -- and wit h the same understanding of economic problems. If such mentally challenged admonitions do not move you, you will likely note th at if a precipice is in front of you, it would be prudent to reverse your direct ion. Continuing to go "Forward" means to fall into an abyss. As things are today, "going back" is realisticallygoing "back to the future." It's a return to the philosophical base and mode of action that originated this nati on. It's where this nation should be going. In some way, to some extent, most Amer icans recognize this. Otherwise, we would not hear that 62.3% of the population d eclare we are on the wrong track. "Going back" means returning to the kind of nation that in our country's infancy was known as "The Empire of Reason." It means recapturing the freedom Americans used to have when our individual righ ts were recognized and considered sacrosanct, when our government defended and p

rotected individual rights, not violated them. It means restoring limited government, wherein the government is constrained by the Constitution and may not interfere in our lives and decisions and choices, w hen we had less to pay in taxes, no usurpation of states' rights, no confiscatio n of citizens' property, no nationalization of businesspeople's achievements, an d no Federal Reserve. Going "back" means restoring to Americans their right to start a business withou t government officials dictating employee salaries. It means recognizing people 's right to choose their own retirement and medical programs. It means not allowi ng government officials to "oversee" business operations under the guise of "pro tecting the public." It means restoring one's right to buy the products one wants and not be forced to buy products one does not want. It means restoring the righ t to trade freely and voluntarily, unobstructed by government officials and regu latory agencies. It means a hand up, not a hand out. In short, going "back" means recapturing and restoring the principles upon which this nation was founded: individual rights, limited government, and free market s. To call such principles "going in reverse" -- and that a huge assembly of Democr at delegates scorns those principles -- shows the destructive influence of lefti st doctrine on our culture. That doctrine is totally alien to the vast majority o f Americans whose convictions more closely follow those of Joe the Plumber: "Don 't distribute my wealth; distribute my work ethic." The Republican leadership has not been exempt from leftist influence, which expl ains why many Republicans in high places have accepted the leftists' premise tha t the past is something dark and dreary and dreadful. Consequently, they have nev er correctly answered the accusation that Republicans eschew progress. The correct answer is: "Yes, we want a return to reason. If that's 'going back,' make the most of it." Working to restore individual rights -- the foundation of our Constitution -- is the most advanced policy possible. The recognition and protection of individual rights is essential to prosperity. To work for their restoration is to be at the forefront of the struggle for a recharged, energetic, renewed civilization. This is why Americans should vote for Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney is the only candida te who through his actions can move us away from socialism -- the direction Obam a is bent on. Put aside the "Big Lie" spouted almost daily that Romney is "unlikable." That is merely the speaker's or writer's own confession. Put aside the refrain that "he cannot relate to the middle class." If he cannot, why is the race neck-and-neck, and why isn't Obama leagues in front of him? Almo st 50% of Americans "relate" to Mr. Romney enough to have decided to vote for hi m. Put aside the notion that "no one knows anything about him." Plenty of material e xists that shows what Mr. Romney islike. You will read that he is a very hard work er, a man who enjoys thought and action and is good at problem-solving. You will learn that he has the courage to make difficult decisions, how to balance a gove rnment budget, and how to reignite certainty so that men will once againbe willin g to take risks, start a business, and create jobs. You will learn about his extr aordinary organizational skills, his ability to bring people together to coopera te and achieve a given goal.

In theNovember election we have a chance to return our nation to "The Empire of R eason." This is why Americans -- Republicans, Democrats, independents, DTS alike -- shou ld vote for Mitt Romney. He is the one man who can take the steps that will stop the fast-forward into Obama's socialist abyss. Those vital steps will be enough t o get us back on track, to recoup and restore our nation of individual rights, l imited government, and free markets. ===###===