Not on your life...... or mine!
VOTE BUSH-CHENEY '04!
Posted on 11/01/2004 9:16:28 AM PST by SeasideSparrow
Dear third-party voter,
A tragedy is about to occur.
I am not talking about the tragedy, the unthinkable calamity that will befall America should John Kerry be elected president of the United States. That a person with a history of actual treason should become commander in chief of America's armed forces during wartime is more bizarre and terrifying than any "Manchurian Candidate" scenario Hollywood could concoct.
No, I'm referring to a different tragedy. The tragedy that idealistic, patriotic, constitutionally minded Christian Americans very possibly will be the ones that actually turn over this nation to Kerry – a man who opposes, and is intent on destroying, every one of their most cherished values.
How could this be?
By most accounts, the presidential race is a dead heat. The fact is, several swing states in the 2000 election were settled by just a few thousand votes. This time around the race looks every bit as close – so every single vote counts.
My friends, the hour is late and the stakes high, so let me just say it straight:
A vote for Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party, or for the Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik – regardless of whatever personal virtues they possess, or those of their party's platform – amounts to a vote for Kerry. After all the high-sounding words have been spoken in justification of voting for either one, this is the undeniable fact that remains. It's the most basic mathematics possible, so I won't insult anyone by explaining it.
Furthermore, the "lesser of two evils" argument that I've heard 1,000 times – usually stated as "voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil" – is shallow and unworthy of those good folks who hold the Constitution and Judeo-Christian heritage so dear. This view, with its emphasis on personally choosing not to support any evil whatsoever, is held largely by religious people, mostly Christians.
But every Christian also knows he or she is a sinner – in a word, evil. Not totally evil, of course, but every human being – including you, me, Bush, Kerry, Peroutka, Badnarik and everyone else – has got a problem with evil. It's only the degree that is different from person to person.
If Bush is truly "the lesser of two evils" – which, put another way, means he is the greater good – then it's indefensible to vote for anyone else than Bush, since that would unquestionably help Kerry – the greater evil.
Let me restate this: If the object of your vote is to avoid supporting evil – and yet by your vote you end of electing the worst possible choice as president when you had it easily within your power to choose a better man – then you have indeed supported evil.
One of the many people who responded to my column on "Voting your conscience" informed me that by voting for Bush instead of Peroutka, I was operating from fear and not faith. We should just vote our consciences, he said (in this case, he was suggesting a vote for the Constitution Party candidate), and leave the outcome to God.
This is a mis-applied principle. Yes, we're meant to live righteously and not be overly concerned with the result. That means we're meant to speak the truth even if it makes us unpopular. We're meant to do the right thing, even if we lose a seeming advantage, even if it hurts, even if we lose our job. This is living from faith and leaving the outcome to God.
But when we have a clear choice between a better option and a worse option, and millions of lives will be affected by our choice, God doesn't require that we do the impossible and make a third option win out. Getting Peroutka or Badnarik elected president is impossible.
What God does hold us responsible for is to do the right thing, to act with wisdom. If America can have a safer nation with a more decent president – or be more endangered with an unprincipled, ambitious sociopath as president – and if we, you and I, are the ones who choose that president tomorrow, then we have a responsibility to choose the better man.
Not to do so will be a tragedy we will remember for the rest of our lives.
This is not an ordinary election. We are at war. That's not a metaphor, as Kerry's campaign says, but rather a real war. Millions of lives are at stake. America's security is at stake. The Supreme Court, America's sovereignty as an independent nation, the lives of the unborn, the sanctity of marriage, freedom of the press – all are at stake in this election.
As we reported in our special "REVOLT ON THE RIGHT" edition of Whistleblower magazine, there have been many times in American history when a robust third-party bid for the presidency has had a powerful and meaningful effect on the course of the nation. But tomorrow is not one of those times. Tomorrow is a time for good people to come together to stop a major evil from descending on this country.
In the last few days, Patrick Buchanan, who ran against Bush four years ago on a third-party ticket, urged Americans to vote this time for Bush. Why?
Likewise, WND's founder and CEO Joseph Farah – who did not support Bush in 2000, who has said for years he would be unable to support Bush in 2004, and who has been very favorable toward third parties – recently changed his mind and endorsed Bush over Kerry. Why?
Even Dr. John Hospers, America's first Libertarian Party presidential candidate, has urged Libertarians not to vote for their own party's candidate, but rather to vote for Bush. Why?
I'll tell you why. Because they realize what is truly at stake in this election. Do you?
Sincerely,
David Kupelian
You didn't bring us to this dance; remember, you all are always so quick to remind us that 4,000,000 of you sat home in 2000.
We got HERE by ourselves.
So, your idea of doing nothing is to come on FR and carp, right?
You're doing a great job!
So emotional.
I am engaged in the process. I vote for whom I believe is the best man for the job. I don't fool myself into believing that a man who says that there ought to be limits to freedom is going to be good for the country.
Well, forgive for saying this but I think voting matters. Politics matters. Issues matter. I see a huge difference between the two parties and the two candidates for President.
I think voting matters, too. But, I don't fool myself into thinking that there's a whit of difference between the republican party and the democrat party.
Yeah, that's right, voting for third party because people were {begin whiny voice} mad because George H. W. Bush broke his promise and signed a tax increase... wha... wha... wha {end whiny voice} led to eight years of Bill Clinton, you idiot.
So emotional.
I thought the presidential term was only 4 years. When did this change?
It's good that you've adopted the whiney voice because it suits you so well.
The truth is that Bush ran a lousy campaign and that's why he lost. Dole ran a lousy campaign and that's why he lost in 1996. The democrats ran a better campaign in both elections and beat you.
You just can't admit the truth and would rather blame third-party boogeymen for the incompetence of your own party.
I'm sure your arguments would be even more convincing if you only used more colorful names in an attempt to insult me and used even more exclamation points at the end of your sentences.
Such is the substance of your arguments.
Then why are you here? If you didn't stand tall when called upon by your country, if you didn't vote when many men and women fought and died for your right to do so, then nothing you say will make any difference.
I did not vote for Bush in 2000. I will do it this year. However, I'm putting all you CINOs on notice. If we get stuck with a socially liberal nominee in 2008, I'll vote and encourage others to vote 3rd party again even if it means a crusty pant suit. Got it? Okay. Thanks. :-)
Yeah, if you want Kerry to win.
Thanks, I've been carping here for a few years now, and I'm still honing my skills.
No, you're missing the point.
Republican and democrat politicians are two sides to the same coin and neither one is working for the long term good of the country.
Instead of being celebrated within their party, McClintock and Tancredo are pariahs.
What does that say about the party?
Not a lot.
I have done my duty, and I have voted....but this time, my conscience will not allow it.
I'm here because I enjoy it.
Not on your life...... or mine!
VOTE BUSH-CHENEY '04!
Someone said: "I have done my duty, and I have voted....but this time, my conscience will not allow it."
Alright. So who then will vote for the unborn?
I never was good at math, but how's this:
Voting pool = 10 people.
Five vote for Kerry. Four vote for W. One votes for Joe Schmuck, the Independent.
Doesn't Kerry win?
Sigh. And who is responsible for that?
THE VOTERS. The last time I checked, we elect our representatives democratically, which means that it's not sufficient to convince the hard-right wingers that you've got the better plan. You have to win over the centrists as well. Put a better way: YOU HAVE TO MOVE THE CENTER in this country if you're going to win elections.
So your solution? Break off the far right wing and form your own little fringe party that the center isn't going to touch with a ten-foot poll (pun intended). It's not going to cut it.
Instead of being celebrated within their party, McClintock and Tancredo are pariahs.
And yet they are there in the trenches. In other words, I have dogs in the race. You've taken your dog to the wrong park.
What does that say about the party?
It says that there are a lot of people out there who need convincing. We have our work cut out for us.
MY perfect candidate? Me.
But I'm not running and if I did I couldn't win.
The best of the lot that's running, whether they can win or not? Peroutka.
Am I voting for Peroutka? No. Because he can't win.
Before ANY 3rd party candidate can win the Presidential election there will have to be much more grass roots support for that party.
The best of the lot that has a chance of winning? President Bush.
And once again, the only reason I will cast my ballot for President Bush is because he will fight the terrorists on THEIR ground, not ours.
But don't tell me that a vote for a third party is a wasted, or turncoat, vote. It isn't.
Yep, why waste a vote on such a critical election?
Kerry is scarey.
You, the voter who blindly supports their party, no matter what.
Faulty analysis. It doesn't matter how many people are in the race.
Bush lost because he failed to convince a majority of the voters that he was the best man for the job.
Same reason his dad lost in 1992 and why Dole lost in 1996.
Wrong. Unlike you, I'm still in the real fight---I'm not enganged in some quixotic third-party misadventure. I vote strategically, and it counts every single time.
I'm sorry to say ANY third party vote now is a wasted vote. VOTE BUSH!!!!
IMHO, it's not about the lesser of two evils. It's about a choice of good or evil. I believe that the President is a good person. I believe that Kerry is the epitome of evil. I will proudly vote for the President. I can't understand why someone that doesn't care enough to vote would even belong to this forum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.