Saturday, August 30, 2008
The Lesser of Two Evils?
I've stated my views rather frankly. I'll expound a bit on why I (a conservative Christian former Republican best described as a 'Constitutionalist') can't vote for McCain with a clean conscience.
I committed at the very begging of all this that there were three men in the Republican race who would never get my vote - the three RINOs. McCain, Romney, and Guiliani. The latter two are so socially liberal that I can't believe they ever got a single Republican vote. Moot point.
In order to consider McCain, I think it's important to look at him prior to the election (true of any candidate, really.) He's in 'get elected' mode now, which means he'll say anything to anybody to get a vote as long as it won't come back to haunt him later on a big enough scale. My beefs:
1. McCain-Feingold ('Campaign Finance Reform.') Blackout dates on free speech. Somewhere here in the near future, it will be illegal for me to actually blog on this election. I can't come up with any more blatant restriction of the First Amendment. I've become increasingly in-tune to rights violations, and I just haven't seen nearly as much trampling of the First Amendment as the Second and Fourth. (I grant you, that's a subjective observation, so I would welcome a challenge on the statement.) But Campaign Finance goes a long way towards making government controlled speech a reality.
2. The gun show loophole. He's no friend of gunowners and never has been. Go ahead and believe what he says today if you want, and get all excited about the cute sit-down he had with LaPierre and Cox a couple months ago, but I'm about ready to cut up my NRA membership card over it. Bitter enemies for how long? And now they're best friends. I'm equally as disgusted with Limbaugh, Hannity and all the other conservatives who at first hated him, but are now waving the pom-pons.
3. His greatest stated principle is his willingness to be 'a maverick' and go 'cross the aisle.' I don't doubt this guy would sell us out to socialized health care in a minute. Maybe he won't be the President that makes it his top agenda item like Obama, but if social medicine gets signed into law, what's the difference?
Palin - She doesn't change anything for me. I agree she seems like a good conservative, and if she was the candidate, I'd vote for her. But a VP doesn't really do very much, and I don't see any point in voting for him hoping he croaks so she can fill his spot.
So to those who plan to vote for him because he won't be 'as bad' as Obama, I'd like to know specifically what you think will be better. I'm not trying to be rude, bitter, or snide. You and I are probably very similar in our views, Stephen. But we've come to different conclusions about what to do, and I'm interested in your thoughts (or for that matter anyone else's who holds the same stance.)
For my part, I've almost reached the conclusion that the ballot box has failed.
3 comments:
- Mulligan said...
-
McCain has a record of crossing party lines to get stuff done. I believe party loyalty to be at the root of most of our national problems. Anyone willing to look at the national goals rather than the party agenda will be a bit of fresh air in that stinkhole DC.
Taking Palin as an example, McCain is obviously making really good choices about the people around him. Being able to select good advisors and subject-matter experts will make the difference as no 1 man does the job alone anymore. I think the people Obama has chosen to surround himself with would be bad for this country at a catastrophic level.
Normally we have the bad and the worse to choose from. Having a hard core anti-corruption VP watching congress for 4 yrears nearly makes me giddy with joy. Granted her limited DC experience may limit her effectiveness, but McCain's experience should make up for it.
I see it as a choice between "the country can survive" and "the country will be ripped apart" - August 30, 2008 at 10:20 AM
-
-
My Friend, Yes, we're much alike; this taken from the little I've read from your blog (just found you) and we agree almost one hundred percent. I believe I'm far older, which doesn't matter in the long run, so perhaps my thoughts on voting for our nation's survival come from a different viewpoint.
Too many good friends/citizens of this nation died in order for you to have the privilege of casting a vote this coming November...you also, as you've stated, have the right to stay home, and by proxy, not vote. But, will it help your country - not the government mind you, the country...will it help our fight/future battle for our Second Amendment. I notice you're reading 'Absolved,' very good. I ask, will Vanderboegh sit this one out...
Agreed, given, McCain is as worthless as tits on a bull, but for me to sit back and allow the Obamamassiah to win - well, I could not in good conscience live with myself.
Forgive an old man is thoughts and poor writing skills.
But, please don't give up the fight, you seem far to bright for such, and my the good Lord bless you. - August 30, 2008 at 10:35 AM
-
-
Good for you. I don't support a system where every outcome is a violation of my rights. Say a criminal came to your house and said, I will give you the right to choose whether I will steal your TV or your Car. Would you participate in the robbery of your house? If such a person were to present me with that threat, I would say, 'my house is a dictatorship, and the choice I make for you is a 230gr present to your grape.'
Since voting as a way to make good decisions is disproved, i.e. median voter theorem, why support the sham?
The more conservatives realize that the government doesn't care about us and doesn't exist for our best interest the better.
"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." - August 30, 2008 at 11:45 AM
But is it practical to sit at home on your butt, on principal, and suffer those consequences...at least McCain's pick of Palin offers hope to those of us within the gun culture.