How would Senator Clinton, or Sen. Obama govern if either were elected as 44th president? Their favorite sound bites revolve around change, empowerment, solutions, future vision, etc. However, an inspection of their voting philosophy makes it easier to visualize what Clinton, or Obama would foist on Americans if either contender won a term in the Oval Office.

Although they appeal to different voting blocs, these two rivals have minor distinctions between their respective platforms. Both are heavy on cliches, but very light on actual accomplishments. Both candidates assert that they want to fix Washington and turn it into a bipartisan nirvana. Of course, Clinton and Obama hope to impose their version of harmony on independent Americans.

As lifelong politicians, these senators are part of the problem because they are so out of sync with most Americans on issue after issue. Their eyes light up as they embrace bloated government as the first option, rather than the last resort our founders intended over 200 years ago. Is there any room for natural liberty on their agenda?

The "changes" and "solutions" proposed by Clinton and Obama would create a dysfunctional dependency on highly flawed entitlements that urgently need reform. Although these competitors invoke the names of prior civil rights leaders and statesmen, they don't emulate those great Americans. Most great leaders opposed a reliance on government, and promoted inner transformation, autonomy, and community solutions.

Clinton and Obama's version of the future is eerily similar to the discredited tactic of class warfare, as well as the failures of Pres. Johnson's "Great Society" of the 1960's. Clinton and Obama claim that they endorse capitalism and the free markets, but their tax and spend mentality would stifle business startups, job creation, free trade, and human productivity. Their grandiose plans would increase deficit spending and the national debt.

Any simpleton is aware that the middle class and wealthy generate millions of jobs and humanitarian endeavors, while their taxes create safety nets for the poor. Yet Clinton and Obama want to punish hardworking folks that earn more than $250K a year with tax hikes. Moreover, these condescending legislators think that they can manage the economy, although neither has executive experience.

Indeed, individual choices, risk taking, and free markets "manage" the economy and keep it dynamic. Central planning (socialism) has always been a colossal failure, yet these candidates are unfazed by historical lessons. Our taxes would be used to subsidize the poor investment and spending decisions of irresponsible companies and individuals.

Is it possible that these senators can be so dense about the basics of free enterprise and the success of supply side economics? One could only hope that the American people and Congress would pressure either one to wake up and move to the center.

Clinton and Obama believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction, despite solid successes over the past seven plus years. They deliver their doomsday message on the campaign trail, yet insist their campaigns reflect change and hope. Unfortunately, these folks have had minimal experience in the private sector. Their power and wealth is derived from just talking, not from delivering a quality product or service.

Clinton and Obama's healthcare plans would further burden taxpayers, increase medical costs, reduce patient choices, and dilute healthcare. Jefferson once noted, "The course of history shows that as government grows, liberty decreases." Clinton and Obama ignore the fact that most Americans want to choose their own health programs, just as they prefer to invest, save, and spend their own money without nanny state meddling.

On foreign policy, Clinton voted for the Iraq war authorization, while Obama has always opposed the war. However, both are determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by telegraphing a phased withdrawal in early 2009. This exit strategy would unfold regardless of the needs and desires of the coalition and the Iraqi people.

It's likely that this defeatist plan would thrill Iran and assorted terrorist groups, because they could strive to further destabilize the region and reverse hard won progress. Democrats often compare Iraq to Vietnam, and indeed their reckless withdrawal could pave the way toward totalitarian rule. It really shows that these candidates have never served in the armed forces.

Both candidates talk a good game regarding energy independence, but either would be so busy appeasing dictators, environmentalists, and the UN, that little would get done. Moreover, how can these liberals, who treat terrorism as a law enforcement function, ever cope with the challenges of rogue states, or expansionary China and Russia? Indeed, Clinton and Obama want to micromanage U.S. defense and intelligence operations through greater "oversight."

The primary duties of the president are to enforce the rule of law, maintain a robust national security apparatus, appoint non-activist judges, and protect civil liberties. Like former president's Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, Senators Clinton and Obama would often neglect these duties because they think they're smarter than the American people and the framers of the Constitution.

Their big government programs would be carried on the backs of hardworking taxpayers who sustain the American Dream. On almost every major issue, these contenders come down on the wrong side of history, whereas most voters favor gridlock over reckless spending.

In his book "The Second Civil War," Ron Brownstein bemoans the fact that there is so much gridlock and partisanship in Congress. However, it might be positive to have gridlock on domestic issues, as it would translate into less intervention in our lives. However, it would benefit our great republic if there were greater bipartisan efforts on matters relating to national security.

Clinton and Obama promise that they will fight for us and encourage individual empowerment. They would do this by cramming wasteful, bureaucratic programs down our throats as they attempt to intrude into nearly every area of our lives. These tone deaf elitists have no clue what most Americans want. Most folks desire autonomy and choose to fight their own battles.

Finally, Clinton and Obama are the antithesis of America, because they yearn to craft an unrealistic future by resurrecting the bankrupt ideas of the past.