The moral relativism of the “lesser of two evils” philosophy has been draining the heart and soul of America for decades. Many of us in the Liberty Movement understand that it is nothing new, and have come to expect the abusive and emaciated logic it entails from time to time. However, over the course of the past year it has become apparent to me that the talking points and propaganda that drive the hypocritical worldview are being utilized on an even grander scale than ever before. This fact struck me quite sharply while attending a local GOP Lincoln/Reagan dinner event while I was attempting to gauge the overall danger our country would be facing from potential RINO (Republican In Name Only) sellouts as well as what our hopes were for a possible political solution at the local and state level. The “conservative” rally was, to say the least, disappointing.
One thing that stood out plainly at this event, though, was that there was an overall template; an action plan, a message that had been pre-engineered. Someone had sent out a memo, or an email, or a guide, or perhaps beamed talking points directly into the cyborg brains of these political hacks. Their rhetoric was repetitive and uniform and dry like elbow skin. The demand was clearly stated; regardless of who won the Republican Primaries, no matter how unprincipled, how unconstitutional, how despicable, it was our “duty” as conservatives to back them through the national elections. Obama and the Democrats had to be defeated at all costs…
Now, one of the first tenets or rules that a person learns when delving into the Liberty Movement is that there is no such thing as political parties in America today. There are no conflicting interests in Washington D.C. There is no “grand battle” between left and right for the minds of the masses. It is a sham. A con. A fantasy. A false paradigm.
In reality, the leaderships of both fraudulent parties support essentially the same methodology, and that methodology could be summarized thus: Centralize everything, globalize everything, control everything, grow government power, reduce the effectiveness of the citizenry, turn the public against each other, rob them while they’re distracted. If an American does not understand this dynamic and how it is used to dominate the ebb and flow of our culture, then that American knows nothing. He is lost…
Sadly, even those of us who should very well know better than to fall into the false left/right paradigm trap do so on occasion, as has been made painfully obvious by the foolhardy actions of Rand Paul and his blank check endorsement of Mitt Romney. Certainly, this epic blunder, which seems to me to be a blind stab at political maneuvering on the part of Ron Paul’s son, has set off an angry firestorm amongst true Constitutionalists who know every lie Mitt Romney has ever told. People are using words like “betrayal”, and “traitor”, and with good reason, but let’s look at this calamity from the other side of things for a moment…
There are others out there who would applaud Rand Paul’s decision. While many of them will openly admit that they do not feel very secure in the shadow of a Romney presidency, they still rationalize their position by making the “lesser of two evils” argument. “America may be going off the edge of a cliff”, they say, “but at least Romney won’t press the gas peddle as hard as Obama”. Here are just a few of the many reasons why this way of thinking will lead to the end of our society as we know it…
Lesser Of Two Evils? There’s No Such Thing…
First of all, asserting that there is such a thing as a “lesser of two evils” is an act of naivety. It relies on a very dangerous assumption; that one can somehow quantify which candidate is going to hurt the country less. I’ve even read essays by people who pretend they can mathematically delineate the “more evil” of the evils! Not surprisingly, their “logic” invariably leads them to proclaim the lesser evil to be the candidate of the party they happen to belong to. Ignorant Republicans always see the Democrat as the greater evil, while ignorant Democrats always see the Republican as the ultimate monster.
Here’s some math for you: there are two candidates for President of the United States, one is a cannibalistic serial killer who plans to murder 20 more people with his own hands while in office. The other is a cannibalistic serial killer who only plans to kill 19 innocents personally. Which candidate do you support?
The correct answer is NEITHER.
Unless you are a fan of murder, there is no inherent difference between these two demonic bureaucrats. They both stand in opposition to the guiding principles of inborn conscience, as well as the protections provided by the laws of free people. The fact that one man will do slightly less damage during his reign is irrelevant. Is a choice between Stalin and Hitler, for instance, really a choice at all? Which one is the "lesser evil" in this equation?
Some may argue that this comparison is a bit over the top. I beg to differ. Presidents have the power not only to maim and kill en mass, but they also have the power to dismantle the laws which protect our civil liberties. To drive the point home as far as Romney and Obama are concerned, let’s watch the following video, which removes the blinders and exposes these two charlatans for what they really are; two peas in a pod:
A refusal to vote, or a vote for a third party, is not a vote for Obama, or a vote for Romney, but a vote against the charade.
There is no such thing as a “lesser evil”. Either a candidate follows the path of truth and honor, or he does not. If he does, he deserves our support. If he does not, or if both candidates are criminals, then they both must be tossed to the wayside. Just because the system has deliberately limited our choices does not mean we are required to participate in the flim-flam.
Participation Is A Duty?
I have also heard the argument that by refusing to participate within the system, and by refusing to choose a specimen from the carnival of horrors we are presented every election cycle, we are doing more harm to America than good. This is the most prevalent falsehood of our era.
The bottom line is, Americans have been dancing in the lesser of two evils pageantry for generations and our Constitutional shield has only been further degraded and destroyed in that time. I defy anyone to show how choosing Obama over McCain, or Bush over Gore, or Clinton over Bush Sr. has helped this country or its people. Where are these illusory advantages and benefits of participation? Where has our country gone while the public fettered away years trying to decide which ghoul to hand over the scepter of empire to? Or, the ultimate question; what specifically have they achieved? Have they gained anything? Has any minutia of our lives been made better by following the “lesser of two evils theory”? Only a fool would claim yes…
One might argue that a non-vote is the same as putting all bad candidates on the same footing, and that this would be “wrong”. I disagree. In an election in which all candidates share the same disparaging policies, they are ALREADY on the same footing. We simply refuse to give the farce legitimacy by casting our vote for any one of them.
In the game of chess, the primary goal is to diminish your opponent’s options. To force him into a corner where, no matter which choice he makes, he loses. Chess, however, is not life. In life, intelligent and creative individuals have the ability to walk away from the board completely and implement their own solutions. The more we continue to participate in the rigged game, and the more we continue to view the future as a series of self contained boundaries administered by the establishment instead of a wide open frontier in which all is possible, the more we will lose, until there is nothing left.
Only Cowards Compromise In The Face Of Evil
Good does not compromise with evil. As stated above, there is nothing to be gained by it. I find that the people most prone to suggesting or demanding compromise with oligarchs and tyrants are usually cowards who have never faced down any legitimate struggle in their lives with any passion. But, how do they sell this stunted philosophy to others? The illusion here is one of “reason” or “objectivity”.
Fearful men often use the guise of objectivity (even if they are not) to avoid confrontation, especially confrontation with a supposed authority figure or government. Strangely, their powers of reason and deduction invariably seem to lead them to subservience to the establishment structure. Compromise, for them, is a way to protect their flailing egos by playing the role of the “even handed citizen” while at the same time crawling towards servitude.
The argument to this position would, of course, be that many in the Liberty Movement compromise with evil everyday. That we follow laws we disagree with and that we find reprehensible, and that this makes us somehow “hypocritical”. I would say that this is a very narrow and disingenuous view.
Free minded people do not “follow” reprehensible laws so much as tolerate them while working to dismantle them (“following” infers acceptance). Being honorable and generally of good will, we look for peaceful avenues of redress and change. But, if those avenues are closed to us, and if the injustices expand, the free minded become freedom fighters. Dissent and even revolution are inevitable in the face of tyranny. It is an undeniable feature of human nature.
What I find most interesting though is the conundrum that this conflict of interest creates for the skeptical establishment slave. If the Liberty Movement tolerates bad law while searching for a peaceful path towards change, they call us hypocritical. If the Liberty Movement abandons tolerance and brings force to bear against tyranny and its abuse of the law, they call us “fringe extremists”. Apparently, the only way we can be correct in the eyes of self proclaimed objectivists is if we bow to the constraints of the system, sit back, keep our mouths shut, and enjoy the bread and circuses.
The Greatest Evil Is Moral Relativism
Collectivist governments seek to encourage extreme moral flexibility. Totalitarian regimes cannot survive otherwise. The lesser of two evils sales pitch is, in the end, an extension of the methodology of moral relativism. It trains us to embrace the status quo, whether we like it or not, and to continuously rationalize our adherence to the sham just to get through the day. The mental gymnastics we are required to perform become more complex and unstable. Eventually, in order to ease our consciences which are screaming in agony at the pit of our chests, we have to stop caring about anything, and just go through the motions of participation.
This is not the way to freedom.
There are other ways to secure liberty beyond elections, but for these strategies to be effective, we have to stop asking for permission from the establishment before we take action. Perhaps you seek to step outside the box and away from the controlled paradigm. Perhaps you seek to confront the system head on, either exposing its duplicity and evil, or erasing it as an obstacle completely. The system, its laws, and its political theater are of no consequence, especially when it has been so corrupted.
Moral relativists, though keen on the idea of mutable law, enjoy the trappings of the law as long as it is to their benefit. The law, as I have pointed out in the past, is arbitrary, and always has been. The only true law is the law of inherent and universal conscience. My conscience, as with most other people, tells me that choosing the “lesser of two evils” (an illogical abstraction) sends a message to the elitists that manipulate our culture that I am willing to help them perpetuate their fiction. I become an accomplice in the crime. I commit self mutilation. I give power to the lie.
Such institutionalized misery can only be undone by uncompromising men and women who put principles and conscience before comfort, or even before their own lives. All throughout history, this is how wrong is undone. No society ever changed for the better by casting aside their beliefs and their individualism. No society ever changed for the better by choosing the lesser of two evils. No society ever changed for the better by holding out the hand of friendship to despots, maniacs, and con-men in the hopes that they would be spared just a little less tragedy before their time on this Earth is over…
You can contact Brandon Smith at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.
To contribute to the growth of the Safe Haven Project, and to help us help others in relocating, or to support the creation of barter networks across the country, visit our donate page here:
http://www.alt-market.com/donate
Do you have enough Non-GMO seeds in case of economic collapse? Seeds are the OTHER alternative currency, and if you aren't stocked, then you aren't prepared. To buy top quality non-GMO seeds at a special 10% discount, visit Humble Seed, and use the code Alt10
Bookmark
Hits: 39837
Comments (66)
written by Darryl , June 12, 2012
Excellent! I totally agree with you.
It is great to know that there is someone that thinks the same way that I do.
You are an excellent writer & are able to articulate what I have come to believe over the last 20 years.
As a Christian I believe we should passively withdraw from the system & prepare for the worse.
Thank you for an excellent article
written by Sneed Hearn , June 12, 2012
Seems to me Paul and those of us who support him are the RINOs as the R party long ago became the Progressive Lite party. Those who favor actual libertarian/conservative ideology truly do not belong with these sellouts and cretins.
written by Unknow Rider , June 12, 2012
I'm a liberty loving constitutionalist, and I wish things were different, but I have to ask: do you really think the nation would not be far worse off having Obama - who denies the private sector has any value except as an object to be looted - swing the Supreme Court to the radical left for the next 20 or 30 years?
Cast blame all you want. Rant and rave about why we are where we are. The reality is, we now have the unhappy choice of an anti-colonialist Marxist festering his point of views during a largely unaccountable second term, or someone with at least a resume of private sector experience. The second reality is, preach liberty all you want, you can't force people to take responsibility for themselves, especially when we have government schools and popular culture telling them there's no reason to.
So unless your plan is to see America swept into bankruptcy and social chaos, hoping that a new wave of libertarianism will arise from the ashes, you're barking at the moon (Obama is hoping that European Social Democracy - or maybe full Marxism - will arise from those same ashes).
Remember the final words of Vercingetorix, leader of the Gauls, before he was executed by Caesar, "I'm a free person from a free country."
written by Brandon Smith , June 12, 2012
@Sneed
I think Rand's decision is a huge mistake, but I am not going to hold it against Ron. I think it a bit presumptive to cast aside Ron Paul at this time, and I plan to wait and see how he handles the situation.
Also, there are some Libertarians out there who consider themselves "purists", and it seems NO candidate could ever live up to their standards. I don't plan to capitulate to that group either.
@Unknown
You obviously were not paying any attention to the article or the video. There is NO difference between Obama and Romney. Their policies are IDENTICAL. You have been conned into placing hope in the false left/right paradigm. A vote for Romney is a vote for the banksters. A vote for Obama is a vote for the banksters. Please wake up.
written by DukeT , June 12, 2012
Face it, with the colonized brains of most USAers, only ~5% will pull themselves away from TV or their iPhones long enough to research anything that resembles the history or philosophies that led us to be socially free or those that have led us to be in the advanced state of intellectual-emaciation that we possess as a people. You can't expect brain surgery by a fry cook any more than you can expect truth from Satan.
Only 1% of the 5% possess the courage you mention that is required to bring any action to the table of social change.
Our only hope at this point lies in the Rapture and living a life suitable of gaining a position on the invitation list.
written by Brandon Smith , June 12, 2012
@Duke
I think waiting around for the rapture to whisk us away is as non-productive as voting for Obama or Romney. Nothing good was ever accomplished by passively waiting for things to fix themselves. The number of people with the courage to act is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the strength of their will to endure the fight.
written by newbie prepper , June 12, 2012
I have read many articles discussing this topic and this article is by far one of the best. Great job Brandon.
written by PioneerWife , June 12, 2012
I have to agree with Brandon that there are quite a few things I'd rather do than vote for Romney.
I think situations like this is when we are called, perhaps by God, perhaps by our own hearts, to do what is right. What is right is to show our unswerving support for Ron Paul. To show that we will still contribute towards his campaign, to show that we will volunteer to canvas neighborhoods to spread his message, to show that Liberty is not intimidated by Romney or any other common street bully.
The powers that be are waiting for all of us, Ron Paul included, to tuck tail and run. I am loathe to give them the satisfaction and you should be too.
written by Bethel , June 12, 2012
A vote for either is a vote for the shadow figures who will win either way. This is what we deserve and we know it. Don't we? What happened to Israel (before) was written for us. Who do you think the 'gentiles' were? It was dispersed Israel. That is who we are.
They are His enemies and He will deal with them. Never once does He instruct us to kill them. He says they'll kill us for His sake and I believe Him. Does this mean we do nothing? NO, emphatically. We are in spiritual warfare and none of this election poppy-cock means jack. The weapon at our disposal is prayer and is more powerful than anything the enemy can muster.
A vote is nothing more than a vote of confidence for the man-made system. I won't choose between a Mormon and a Muslim. Ridiculous. The powers and principalities we struggle against didn't offer a Christian candidate for all the right reasons. Too risky, as, the result would offer evidence of what this country, at it's core, is; a Christian nation. Here in the middle states we are immune to having that fact clouded by anything. We know who we are. We are His. I've read ahead.... we win.
written by The Sleeper has Awakened , June 12, 2012
We are told that on the far Left of the political spectrum we find Communism, which is admittedly dictatorial. But, we are also told that equally to be feared is the opposite of the far Left, i.e., the far Right, which is labeled Fascism.
We are constantly told that we should all try to stay in the middle of the road, which is termed democracy, but by which the Establishment means Fabian (or creeping) socialism. (The fact that the middle of the road has been moving inexorably leftward for sixty years is ignored.) An excellent example of the use of false alternatives. We are given the choice between Communism (international socialism) on one end of the spectrum, Nazism (national socialism) on the other end, or Fabian socialism in the middle. The whole spectrum is socialist!
This is absurd. Where would you put an anarchist on this spectrum? Where do you put a person who believes in a Constitutional Republic and the free enterprise system? He is not represented, yet this spectrum is used for political definitions by a probable ninety percent of the people of the nation.
There is an accurate political spectrum. Communism is, by definition, total government. If you have total government it makes little difference whether you call it Communism, Fascism, Socialism, Caesarism or Pharaohism. It's all pretty much the same from the standpoint of the people who must live and suffer under it. If total government (by any of its pseudonyms) stands on the far Left, then by logic the far Right should represent anarchy, or no government.
Our Founding Fathers revolted against the near-total government of the English monarchy. But they knew that having no government at all would lead to chaos. So they set up a Constitutional Republic with a very limited government. They knew that men prospered in freedom!
written by Travis Bruce , June 12, 2012
This is a really well thought out and articulated opinion that I have been preaching for over 6 months now and I am somehow, to my friends, the idiot?
Great Job Brandon and I hope you don't mind but I am posting this on my facebook page and emailing it to every address I have in my contacts.
Oh, and by the way, the fraud that is Ron Paul has never accomplished anything! EVER! So all the Ron Paul minions need to look elsewhere for their savior because you are backing a loser who enjoys being a loser.
written by Spartan , June 12, 2012
@Brandon
"The number of people with the courage to act is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the strength of their will to endure the fight. "
I've also heard it stated as follows: "It's not the size of the man in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the man."
Another masterpiece. Keep it up.
written by Chief Angus , June 12, 2012
Brandon,
Though I appreciate (and like) all your arguments, I admit I'm no great philosopher. So I can't comment on the cogency of your arguments. I can, however, suggest to you that having a second person look over your article before publishing woud possibly strengthen your writing. There are several spelling and syntax errors here that may have been caught by another pair of eyes. Eliminating basic writing errors will help the overall strength of your arguments.
That being said, I think this is an eloquently-stated set of arguments for something I have been thinking for quite some time. I hope more article like it gain more readership around our troubled country.
written by Brandon Smith , June 12, 2012
@Chief
I haven't had anyone else complain, so, the errors must be minimal. I don't see them.
Also, I don't necessarily follow traditional academic writing methods, because they limit expression and serve little purpose except to make uppity professors happy. If someone refuses to consider the message of the article simply because it doesn't follow rigid English syntax guidelines, then they are not worth my time anyway.
written by Lothur , June 12, 2012
The responsibility that comes with the power to vote is at the start of the process not at the end. Local offices are filled with future national "leaders".
With less than half of the American population registered to vote and roughly a third of those actually voting at any stage of the process it's no wonder liberty has been set aside for convenience.
Less than 33 percent of REGISTERED voters exercise their power to remove inadequate candidates at an early stage.
So really, it's easy for the wrong people to gain power over all of us. They only need to brainwash a quarter of the population.
Voting starts at home not in D.C.
written by John Galt II , June 12, 2012
Brandon, another wonderful expose on the trials of the 1%. The 1% of the American population that have their eyes open; the 1% that see the ills that have pervaded our government; the 1% that have dedicated themselves to believing in the liberties and freedoms that this nation was built upon.
I have been remarking this same general commentary for quite some time and (not to pat myself on the back) staked several wagers over two years ago that Romney would be the opposition to Obama for exactly the reason that it is what the ruling elite establishment wishes.
I am vigilantly trying to persuade conservatives, liberals, neo-cons, progressives and anybody that has an IQ over 85 that the course our 'leadership' is taking is sending an already sinking ship further to the bottom. It becomes frustrating for me to continue to shout from bell-towers and high mountain peaks to an audience that doesn't appear to be listening. Knowing there are groups and individuals, like yourself and some of your readers, gives me the stamina to continue to fight for what is needed, what is right and what can change things for this country.
Thank you for another excellent commentary for the enlightened.
written by itor , June 12, 2012
"No matter who you vote for, the government gets elected."
Mark Twain
Face it, voting IS the problem. The system IS the problem. The CONstitution IS the problem.
Voting, and a belief in same got us here. It CANNOT get us out.
Those believing Lincoln/Reagan to be conservatives? Hysterical. Pathetic.
Hearing that Rand Paul supported romney - there was a reason for cautious observation of him, not fawning support. Should Ron Paul do the same - my support of him (since '88) would be gone forever.
Reading this article, i wondered what would best signal defiance of the system - a US flag? upside down? No - the jolly roger comes closest.
written by Brandon Smith , June 12, 2012
@itor
The Constitution is not the problem, nor is the concept of voting. The problem is that both mechanisms of our republic have been supplanted by globalist elitists. Yes, many people in our society have stood idle while this occurred, but the ultimate blame still falls to the criminals running D.C. THEY are the source of our ills, not the principles that started and originally guided this country.
written by Ripley , June 13, 2012
"The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must dis-enthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." -- Abraham Lincoln
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure." -- Ripley [Aliens]
written by The Sleeper has Awakened , June 13, 2012
@Brandon
"Their rhetoric was repetitive and uniform and dry like elbow skin."
I keep going back to this phrase because it's SO well put!
written by Sheila , June 13, 2012
Nail on the head: "In reality, the leaderships of both fraudulent parties support essentially the same methodology,"
We are given an illusion of choice. The plan will be carried out by whomever they allow to live in the White House. What really matters is how you choose to live your own life.
Peace,
Sheila
http://survivingsurvivalism.com
written by Sheila , June 13, 2012
I heard what must have been for me 'the stupidest thing I ever heard someone say'
'I guess I'll have to hold my nose and vote this year'"
JUST STOP COMPLYING!!!
Peace
Sheila
www.survivingsurvivalism.com
written by JohnJeremyVines , June 13, 2012
Excellent article. Everyone considering voting this year should see that video.
Needless to say but I'll say it anyway, under no circumstances could I consider voting for Obamney.
Currently, I'm torn between voting third party and abstaining. Depends on who all makes my State's ballot.
Keep up the good work and best of luck.
written by Lightweight , June 13, 2012
Whhen my candidate drops out of any race,then I have no one to vote for in that race.We hear vote your conscience,the why keeping picking candidates ? It your conscience. And if an endorsement of those you thought you were for disappoints you,abandon them because they are asking you to violate you conscience for the idea you will struggle with after ? The Problem is we are in the condition we are in because of a lack of RESOLVE.Resolve will send these peole out of politics because they will learn they are not dealing with slaves.Don't complain you are tired of the same politicians sontinuely being re-elected and keep doing the same thing.That is insanity illustrated.
written by MRobs , June 13, 2012
I agree with your assessment but you offer no alternatives. There are many among us who feel the same way and know that this country needs a revolution and needs one now. Our country is being run by a criminal cabal. They are stealing our money and enslaving us through unreasonable taxation. I have joined the US Patriots Union in hopes of at least doing something and keeping myself current on the evil machinations of our politicians. Alas, I fear it may be to late - I am considering leaving the country and taking my money with me.
written by Brandon Smith , June 13, 2012
@MRobs
This website is loaded with suggestions for alternatives. Peruse the pages.
However, what would be even better is if YOU were to offer an alternative of your own design rather than waiting for others to offer one for you.
written by American Patriot , June 13, 2012
Peaceful Resistance
At the core of this issue is the fact that people continue to volunteer themselves as slaves of the system by signing their names as debtors. No liberty loving American, Libertarian, or the like can truly consider themselves completely immersed in the fight to return precious Freedom to this land while being mired in debt, whether it be for a car, a house, or anything else. By taking any bank loan you give legitimacy and power to the oligarchs through their most powerful tool, the very tool that continues to fund all this madness, the Federal Reserve. This fight can be won by following a simple 3 step process. 1. Extinguish personal debt at the maximum rate possible (pay it or otherwise). 2. Convert all dollar denominated savings, stocks, bonds to commodity money (gold, silver, pocket knives, guns, whatever). 3. Pay for all small items such as lunch with coins that are issued by the US Treasury instead of Federal Reserve Notes issued by the oligarchs. Marginalize the Fed at every opportunity and kill their golden goose. This fight can be won, in the manner described above, by far less than 1% of the population.
written by A Real Christian , June 13, 2012
@Bethel
You, sir, are a collectivist, just a different kind than Obama. What do you have to offer to "prove" that Mormons don't believe in Christ? Why would they call themselves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? To trick people?
I am a Mormon and I don't support Romney or any of his policies. I believe in freedom for me to practice my religion and freedom for you to worship a three-headed god you call "trinity" that you claim resembles Christ.
This is exactly what the author was talking about. The politicians and people in power get people fighting and then steal their wallets while everybody's distracted.
Don't fall for it. I don't care about your wacky beliefs, so why should you care about mine if we agree on the important things like the Savior's role in our lives and individual God-given rights?
written by American Patriot , June 13, 2012
Please don't condemn the LDS faith or ANY faith for that matter based on the actions of its members, especially those who are politicians! Consider only the doctrine and teachings, and be sure you're getting the truth by going directly to legitimate websites sponsored by the organizations you are studying. Many (most) of Romney’s actions as a politician and public "servant" are in diametric opposition to our faith. I do not support him either.
written by Brandon Smith , June 13, 2012
@American Patriot
I agree. I know plenty of LDS people who are very well aware of the globalist problem and are preparing themselves for the fight. Statists exist in EVERY religion, as well as Atheism.
written by dan'l , June 13, 2012
The source of our ills is an ignorance of the relationship between Judeo- Christian values and the well being of our Republic and its' economic system of capitalism, this ignorance being fostered and nourished by the progressive movement for over a century. It's the classic battle of good vs evil with evil having pervaded the religious and educational systems and flipping the values and logic 180 degrees. Furthermore, "diversity" and the balkanization of this society prevent any coalition other than that of Alinskyite grievance groups from gaining too much traction. The only thing that could cause our country to unify would be an attack by outsiders which could be why we haven't been attacked since 9/11/2001 seeing as how we are crumbling quite nicely without overt help.
written by ReaganTeaPartyConservative , June 13, 2012
I have been saying the exact same message and words, and warnings of these exact same type of progressive GOP establishment permanently entrenched political class elitist politicians, aka RINO's, that Ronald Reagan fought against, that have colluded and partnered with each other against the people, aka the Tea Party Reagan Conservative folks all across America, to maintain their grip and hold onto power and money in Washington DC, for which I stated for the past year, and will continue to do so, regardless of moderators of all manner of web sites, who try to stifle me and the truth by blocking me and banning me. But I will not be silenced nor deterred on this point, as you have so articulately in detail have written and stated.
These progressive RINO's are just as insidious, and as poisonous, and as cancerous to Democracy, Freedom, Liberty, and the America Republic as Obama is, in fact worse, as they do this under the guise of being Republicans, ie; the opposite political party, which is the same as have the very traitors you are fighting against as your leaders. This why we must rid the GOP of all of them, no matter how long it takes !
There is also another twist to this in this RINO saga..
Liberals pretending to be disaffected and disenfranchised Republicans in the media bloggershpere.
I exposed this hack for what he is yesterday, and will do it here.
Article in Memorandum.com
Why I Gave Up On Being a Republican
By Michael Stafford - Memorandum.com - The Cagle Post
Jun 12 2012
quote-
"Today, however, I am a registered Republican no longer.
I came to the decision to leave the GOP not with a heavy heart, but with a broken one." etc, blah, blah, blah..
-
I won't put the whole article here, but you can read it yourself at memorandum.com.
My Response to Michael Stafford's article, thus to Mr Michael Stafford himself-
Mr. Michael Stafford, the whole premise and essence of your article is a snide intentional insinuating attempt to smear the Reagan Constitutional Conservative Tea Party folks, by playing the disaffected and disenchanted Republican, by trying to blame the cause of your disaffection and displeasure of every problem in the GOP Republican Party on the Tea Party constitutional conservative people, aka extremists, and not the anything the progressive GOP establishment does and says in their so called compromising by appeasing the liberals at every turn, expanding govt and spending as much as the democrats under Obama does.
You are no different from those liberal Democrats who use those very same tactics to distort and twist the truth for their own means and agenda.
This is typical of liberal progressive RINO's, because they, the powers that be in the GOP establishment Party, are fearful of losing their grip and hold onto power and money within that Party apparatus machinery, to the Tea Party, aka "the People".
This laughable attempt to insinuate and smear snidely and cleverly the Tea Party in this article is of course resulting from Jeb Bush's attacks upon the Tea Party and Ronald Reagan Conservatism, as well as against Reagan himself, by pitting constitutional conservative President Ronald Reagan of yesterday, against the Tea Party People of today.
This is an old political ploy to compound the effect by of a certain criticism, by accumulated articles by trying to give the appearance of credibility to the lie.
Michael Stafford you are not fooling anyone, but the already progressive GOP establishment Republicans, as I can read and comprehend english Mr Stafford.
This is kind of garbage that the liberal progressive GOP Republican RINO establishment wants to put out there, and the liberal Obamacrats pretending to be RINO's are trying to do, to make false insinuations, smears, and lies against the average American person, aka the Tea Party folks.. so that both sides can collude and be happy sharing power and money in Washington DC to run their liberal policies as they see fit without any interference from the people, aka the Reagan Conservative Tea Party folks, who upset their little apple cart privileged entrenched permanent political class elitist world.
Not going to happen RINO's, not if we the Reagan Conservative Tea Party folks have anything to say about it !!
written by BrutalTruth , June 14, 2012
Brandon, I would totally agree with your premises, but it's the conclusion, (not voting), I cannot agree with.
If there are no other choices than the two parties, then fine, don't vote. But if there is a worthwhile third party or write in capability, then that's the correct choice.
A persons moral high ground is totally lost if you do not participate. Either vote or revolt. Otherwise, that person is taking no stand and in my opinion, has no right to then complain.
written by Eric H. Bowen , June 14, 2012
Four years ago I held my nose and voted for mccain/PALIN because, "He's not quite as bad as 0bama." What an inspiring battle cry. So what did we get out of that? We got 0bama anyway and four years later we get a Republican candidate who is virtually a carbon copy of mccain.
Do I really look forward to four more years of the zero? No. But I'd rather have four years of 0bama to be followed with somebody like Reagan than eight years of Romney, followed by another eight years of somebody else like Romney, followed by...you get the picture.
Unless the Republican establishment learns the hard lesson that they ignore the conservative base at the peril of being abandoned by them, we will continue to have an unending stream of "Etch-a-sketch" candidates.
written by roger in florida , June 14, 2012
Romney and Obama agree that grass is green, the sky is blue and sugar is sweet. Clearly they are actually the same person!
You people should grow up:
Crazies should have guns?
Uninsured people should be left at accidents to die of their injuries right there on the sidewalk?
Iran should be left to pursue regional hegemony and control 40% of the world's oil supply?
And on and on.
What a bunch of dopes.
written by DocB , June 14, 2012
The puppetmasters who have controlled our national and much of the world economy since 1913 are grinning from ear to ear when we argue about whose fault the current national and world economic and political mess is...
It no longer matters who sits in the White House... Governments around the world are controlled by the mega-corporations whose greed is boundless, and whose integrity is completely non-existent.
We have too long been distracted by the noise, and smoke, and flashing lights that are supposed to be the ogres "causing" our deterioration as a nation...
It is time to unmask the "wizards" who established and maintain this massive charade.... so they can go about sucking the life out of our country and ultimately the human race...
WATCH THE MOVIE: ETHOS (2011, Netflix or YouTube)
written by Brandon Smith , June 14, 2012
@brutaltruth
Did you not read the entire article? I talk about voting for third party candidates. Of course, that's IF they are actually mindful of the Constitution.
@Roger
Your ignorant and uneducated response only reinforces my point. Obviously, if you had watched the included video, you would have seen that Obama and Romney share almost IDENTICAL policy initiatives. This is the POINT of the article! If they are the same in policy, then YOU HAVE NO CHOICES. Only an idiot would argue otherwise, or argue that this is a "good thing" for the country.
written by Cheetah , June 14, 2012
Thanks Brandon! Now I have some excellent points to throw back at the RNC when they call asking for money and give me this lesser-of-two-evils argument when I say that I will not support Romney with a donation or a vote.
Both parties have just over two months to fix this charade. Will they? The GOP will go the way of the Whigs if they don't and Pres. Obama is destroying the Democrat party.
I am writing-in Sarah Palin no matter what!
written by DocB , June 14, 2012
This blog as well as dozens of others is filled with comments that boil down to this argument.... "if different (the correct thinking) politicians were in office... everything would get fixed and be better...
What if our US political system is a giant red-herring, to keep everyone busy cursing the political figure-heads... while a handful of greedy billionaires manipulate the entire world economy and the national as well as international flow of government... The momentum of this impending disaster has been building for more than 100 years, cleverly staged as the triumph of democracy... while it is actually the epitome of unbridled greed and self-interest indulged by the few at the expense of everyone else... around the world.
written by prefer ron but will take rand , June 14, 2012
As a believer in the tea party movement I only have to see which party more closely identifies with them/me. Currently it's the repubs. Until we get enough power to put our own presidential candidate on the ballot (and I don't think that will be long) I will support the party that has the most tea party backed pols in it's ranks. These proud but few are helping get this run away train back under control. I just hope we have enough track left.
Choose a side or get run over...
written by Brandon Smith , June 14, 2012
@Prefer
I choose the side of the Constitution and civil liberties. If a candidate refuses to defend those principles, and represent them faithfully, he is not on my side, and he is not worth voting for. His party affiliation is irrelevant.
written by Linda Starr , June 14, 2012
I don't think Mitt Romney, while not my first choice, is either.
written by Brandon Smith , June 15, 2012
@Linda
Well, his position is exactly the same as Obama's, whether you want to admit it or not. So, however you categorize Obama, Romney will share the same distinction.
Why is this fact so difficult for people to wrap their heads around? It's as if they are presented with two identical circles, yet they insist one is a circle and one is a square. Cognitive dissonance is amazing...
written by Shadrach , June 16, 2012
Brandon,
Very well stated indeed. I came across some information this evening that provides an explanation as to why Rand Paul endorsed Mitt Romney. You probably already heard this as well. I have no idea if this is true but, it was a plausible scenario. Basically, it was a political move whereby Rand Paul's endorsement of Romney is the extension of the olive branch to the establishment Republican Party from the fringe constitutionalist, tea party side. The agreement involves Rand endorsing Romney with the hopes that Romney will be able to land some of the diehard Ron Paul faithful who "pack it in" and yield to the GOP. In return, the establishment Republican Party will allow Ron Paul to have a more prominant role at the Republican National Convention in Tampa.
I for one am voting for Ron Paul regardless.
May God continue to richly bless you and thank you so much for your eloquence.
written by Brandon Smith , June 16, 2012
@Shadrach
Yes, I know that that is the general rationalization for Rand. Unfortunately, it was a really stupid move. The GOP is NOTORIOUS for leading-on Liberty Movement candidates and feeding them whatever lies necessary to get their support. I know this sounds cynical, but I have experienced this first hand in local elections in Montana. I have had dealings with liberty candidates who were approached by neo-con dirtbags offering false concessions. It's disturbing how easily lies come to these people. Romney is no different. He will say whatever he has to say to lure in the Constitutionalist crowd back into the globalist fold. I think they greatly underestimate us, however. Even if Ron Paul were to throw his weight behind Romney, the vast majority of us will NOT support that two faced leech. Not a chance.
written by blackbird , June 16, 2012
Hi Brandon, I emailed out your excellent article. I agree with you and Unknow Rider here in the comments.
I am a supporter of Governor Palin her vision and ideas, she gave a very good speech yesterday at Right Online.
I told a friend right after the 2008 election that Romney was slated to be the next Republican nominee for President. It's so transparently clear what the folks are up against.
written by Reagan Tea Party Conservative , June 16, 2012
The article is great and I could not have said any better myself, and have said many times before.
Now how do we, the Patriotic Reagan Conservative Tea party folks deal with an unwanted unedible nauseating choice of a radical anti-American Liberal progressive socialist-marxist, or a Mass. liberal progressive RINO Republicrat, aka the lesser of 2 evils.
Thus poses the question to America- Is this the best we, the American People can do ?
As well as this question to Patriotic Constitutional Conservative American Tea Party folks, what are our options and what can we do, and what are we to do ?
Mr Mass liberal progressive GOP establishment RINO Romney, ie; the new Bush, is an a win win situation to become the next US President. But that is his goal in the first place, as that's all he cares and think about, himself and his lust for the US Presidency.
The only way we Reagan Constitutional Conservatives can gain a stake and foothold of some sort of semblance of conservative policy and agenda in this situation, is to gain as many Reagan Constitutional Conservative elected leaders in the US Senate and the House this 6 Nov., to force Romney's hand to be more conservative in policy and executed law.
Romney's past as Gov of Mass., reflects what Romney will be in the future as President, as he has never veered away from what he was and what he is now. He is a liberal progressive, as he has so publically stated, along with his record as Gov. Thus he has never shown any ability, willingness, or propensity whatsoever to be either conservative in thought, policy, or action, ever.
Romney's record as Mass Gov. clearly shows that Romney supported gun control, liberal activist judges, inferior substandard forced mandated socialized state medicine, tax hikes, every asinine kooky global warming cap and trade policy, and just about every other asinine budget busting liberal progressive idea that came down the Mass pike.
Will Romney repeal and overturn Obamacare and Frank-Dodd.. Not likely, which is to say politely "no" he will not, and is why we must have as many real Reagan Conservative Tea Party folks in Congress as possible to force Romney's hand to govern more conservatively in either domestic policy or international policy.
This is not and will not be an easy task, as Romney is neither conservative, nor does he care about being conservative, let alone care about conservatives period, as he has already shown his contempt for us, by ignoring us at every turn. He believes he can win and govern without conservative support because he only needs his base and the Independents to win, which all has been his political campaign strategy and tactic up to this point with his constant 24/7 carpet bombing of negative Ads aimed at his conservative Primary opponents, paid for with multi-millions of dollars from his crony buddies at Goldman Sach's and the GOP establishment Party apparatus, and so on.
But Romney he does care bout one thing, being perceived as being weak and appeasing and ineffective in handling the affairs of America as the US President, as opposed to just a governing a State from within the Nation. This is a completely different matter that if he doesn't take seriously, will destroy him in the eyes of the American people, as Obama has done to himself in the eyes of America and American history. As with Obama, governing the Nation with the wrong policies and without full support of Congress and the American people after the same period of 3 years without significantly improved results, that can be and will be the end of his Presidency, if he does not take it, and us seriously.
This is the only way he can be handled, and the only way we can have an impact to further any conservative cause and agenda of any real conservative value and principle worth.
written by howie m , June 17, 2012
At the end of the (election) day, someone will win, someone will lose, and NO ONE will know or care about who did not vote. What kind of protest is that?
When there is an election, it is the results that count, and there will be results which each of us can influence by voting.
While I can understand Brandon Smith's frustration as well as my own, it looks to me like he is trying to keep libertarians and conservatives from voting to help Obama win. Why else would he tell people not to vote?
Not voting is not a protest, it is a cop-out.
When the polls close and the votes are counted, no one sees the non-votes, they only see who wins...and who loses.
The serial killer example is ridiculous except when applied to Obama. There is no evidence at all that Mitt Romney become a totalitarian, but if Romney is elected and continues pushing us down the Road to Serfdom, then it will be the time to fight.
To even imply that Romney and Obama are the same means that Smith knows the future. Please point us to your crystal ball manufacturer. If you know the future, Mr. Smith, then please tell us on which day Al Gore’s version of earth will start frying.
Being willing to fight is important, but in America we try voting first. Voting got rid of Jimmie Carter and we got Ronald Reagan, a former Democrat. Today we look at both in hindsight and know who each was. No one was really sure what Reagan would do until he got in office and did it, and he did it well. Can Mr. Smith guarantee us that Romney will be just as bad as Obama? Can he guarantee that Romney will definitely not be another Reagan? If he can I want some proof.
If there is a chance that Romney will be better than Obama, failure to vote could be creating a lost opportunity of momentous proportions.
Also let's not forget that besides the office of president, there are also elections for members of congress. If you stay home from the polls and the Marxists regain control of both houses, what do you think happens then? Within the next few years a number of SCOTUS justices will likely retire. By not voting you might just be throwing away all chances of getting better replacements for the Marxists sitting there now, and conservative replacements for retiring conservatives.
If you stay home and let Obama win, America will be turned into a slave state.
I say to Brandon Smith if he is so sure of what Mitt Romney is going to do, then prove it - now. If you think that Obama will turn America into a slave state, are you just going to sit in front of the TV and watch it happen on Election Day?
Here is what your protest non-vote will accomplish. Down the road when your grand kids ask, “Grandpa, why are you wearing chains”, you can then proudly reply, “Because I didn’t vote in 2012.” On the other hand the kids may be asking why they are wearing chains.
As Thomas Sowell is rightly fond of saying, always ask, “What happens next?” before you make decisions or analyze something.
written by Brandon Smith , June 17, 2012
@Howie
Yet another person who attempts to ignore the facts of the Romney/Obama situation in order to perpetuate their own skewed perception of how American Democracy truly operates.
Here is a question for you, Howie; can you show us HOW Romney and Obama are fundamentally different on policy or their voting records?
I've already shown how they are exactly alike (facts which you have conveniently ignored). But, hey, if you can show me how Romney will actually be better than Obama based on his record and not your random opinions, then I'm all ears.
Show me how he is a truly Constitution conscious candidate. Show me WHY Liberty Movement voters should vote for him. If he does not support our ideals of freedom according to his record, then why should we waste our time on him? Any halfway intelligent person is going to need a reason bigger than "he MIGHT end up being better than Obama".
written by howie m , June 17, 2012
Brandon, let's start by not calling America a democracy.
Second I cannot show you how Obama and Romney are different, because Romney has not in the Oval Office yet. You could be right that the past is a predictor of the future, but you could also be wrong. I am not trying to say I know the future, but I do know what Obama is likely to do in a second term, and I am not sure what Romney will do in a first term. To me the4 risk of the latter is better than the assurances of the former.
I have read a lot of the presentations on Romney's site, while that is no guarantee he will do what he claims, it is not a guarantee that he will not. Certainly there is the risk that there is no difference, but the only way to prove that is to put Romney in office to see. The alternative is to retain Obama, and that is the end of a free America. But from talking to many conservative friends about your article, you are certainly stirring them up...to go vote.
written by Brandon Smith , June 17, 2012
@Howie
First off, I am well aware that America was MEANT to be a Republic, unfortunately, that is not what we have today.
Secondly, you are obviously dancing around the primary point, which is that according to their VOTING RECORDS, Romney and Obama are almost identical. How else are you supposed to compare candidates? Are we just supposed to vote blindly and "hope" that a candidate will not continue on the dishonest path he has already clearly blazed throughout his career? This is naive.
Finally, your entire argument is based on faulty logic. You are predicating your decision to vote for Romney not on the basis of HIS record, but the record of Obama. A tyrannical candidate is a tyrannical candidate. It is extraordinarily foolhardy to throw your support behind one tyrant just to spite another. In the end, you have not only lost your freedoms, you have also willingly participated in your own enslavement.
written by SouthernConservativelady , June 17, 2012
I believe that there is going to be a lot of trouble, no matter who is elected. If Obama does not win, there will be a race riot. If he does get re-elected, there will be a huge up-rising of conservatives...assuming we actually have an election. Years ago, Phyllis Schafly said there is a group of "king makers" who decide who will be president, and they are able to make it happen with their wealth, power, and influence. No matter what happens, their man is it. If you think about it, how can we know the numbers reported to us are accurate? How can we know, especially if the votes are going to be counted in Spain? Our government has become a huge unsustainable mess. I'm sure you've noticed that newly elected people go to DC as regular middle-class people and, in a short time, they are millionaires. Why? Because Washington does not work for the people but is run on bribes, graft, wheeling and dealing, extortion, blackmail and any other evil you can think of that involves money and power. Put more simply, GREED RULES THE WORLD. The political system will only change when we can find a way to stop politicians from engaging in the shady dealing in order to get rich. I don't think that is possible.
written by howie m , June 17, 2012
Brandon, you are trying to justify not voting. I say you cannot know the future based on the past. You say I am predicating myr decision to vote for Romney not on the basis of HIS record, but the record of Obama.
That is not entirely true. Romney has done things for the good of the country in the past, but not Obama. Anyway I will be voting and not for Obama by default. I would rather take my chances with Romney, because if Obama wins, America will have lost everything, and the tightness of the chains will be all that is to discuss. But if Obama wins, you might just be forced to say farewell to blogging, because Cass Sunstein and his cronies will start deciding which content to push to whom. If you think that Romney will go that far, fine, stay home on election day.
written by Brandon Smith , June 17, 2012
@Howie
And yet, you still have not been able to specify what great things Romney has supposedly done. Why is that?
Again, show me WHY we should vote for Romney beyond the absurd argument that "at least he's not Obama".
Also, I'm not trying to "justify" not voting. I'm perfectly happy to vote for a candidate that is honest, Constitutional, and not bought and paid for by banker interests.
I'm certainly not going to vote for Romney, however, because he does not fit any of those criteria.
YOU, on the other hand, are trying to justify voting for a guy whose record is identical to Obama's; a candidate which you have little regard for. You seem to think that our situation will be better with Romney over Obama, and yet, you STILL have not shown me any tangible difference between the two according to their policies and beliefs.
The hypocrisy is on your end, not mine, friend.
written by howie m , June 18, 2012
Brandon, Obama never managed a thing in his life. Can you deny that Romney did a good job getting the Olympics out of financial trouble? Romney has been a jobs creator, not a jobs destroyer like Obama. While Governor of MA he eliminated a state deficit. Obama does nothing but create debt.
Romney's education is mainly in business, and that is to his credit. Obama might be a lawyer, but there is doubt about that. Much of Romney's education is at some of the few schools in the country that teach people about economic freedom, Hillsdale and Liberty University. I don't know if you have visited the Romney website to see his positions on the issues, but he is saying the right things...in specifics. Obama on the other hand talks in generalities, promises the moon and lies in his quest to push the country into totalitarianism. Romney has made his money by earning it. Obama has never earned anything, except the royalties from books that is it doubtful he ever wrote.
Having done intensive study in venture capital, I know his experience in turning around companies can be very good for the country, and he has a whole country to turn around. Now tell me again in specifics how identical the two records are.
written by Brandon Smith , June 18, 2012
@Howie
I think you need to do WAY more research on Romney's business record. His work at Bain Capital was a travesty, using the concept of "creative destruction", Romney's job at Bain was to eliminate jobs, cut wages, and outsource projects overseas to foreign labor, not create jobs, so that that the company could claim fast profits from the mass layoffs. This corporate process of downsizing and outsourcing is one of the primary reasons why America is in economic dire straights today.
So, essentially, you think that Romney will run this country better than Obama because he favors corporate profiteering at the expense of the U.S. economy and the American worker. You might want to rethink that position. Obama has shown he is also a fan of such strategies...
Also, while we are on the subject of business, both the Obama and Romney campaigns are backed by the SAME global financial corporations, including Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan. They both supported bailouts for said banks and numerous other corporate entities. They both support the actions of the Federal Reserve and continue to promote Keynesian economic principles which have proven time and again to be destructive to the long term health of modern economies.
Your "study" into venture capital has apparently not afforded you any legitimate knowledge of fiscal policy. Obama and Romney support the EXACT SAME economic measures.
Is that really the best you have? Romney ran some businesses and Obama didn't?
Yet, once again, you conveniently ignore the fact that they are both funded by the same corporate interests, and the fact that they promote identical economic policy initiatives. In light of this information, whatever business experience you think is valuable to Romney's campaign is irrelevant. It has been trumped by his own words, actions, and voting record.
Back to the drawing board for Howie...
written by howie m , June 18, 2012
You seem to omit that people do not try to get venture capital unless they are in trouble and need money. If there is no hope of saving them it is better to pull the plug, and use the resources where they can be most efficiently used. While some jobs are lost, others are created when products are made abroad and imported, because it requires import, distribution and sales. When products now made abroad, are imported, consumers get them at lower cost.
Every politician running for high office is supported by corporate interests. That is not news.
You are trying to say you know the future. I don';t think you do.
If Romney does manage to win, and if against the odds I manage to survive another 4 years, we will see what he does, and who is right.
So the best way for yuou and your followers to prove me wrong is to vote for Romney and see what he does. It is pretty obvious what Obama will do. CU in 4 years.
written by Brandon Smith , June 18, 2012
@Howie
Actually, no, not every politician is supported by corporate banking interests. Ever hear of RON PAUL? You have foolishly tried to use the fact that most politicians are bought and paid for as a way to defend the reality that Romney is bought and paid for. Hundreds of wrongs do not make a right.
Also, I'm not omitting the process of venture capital. I'm saying its meaningless. It is entirely irrelevant that Romney participated in such business, because he STILL SUPPORTS THE SAME ECONOMIC POLICIES AS OBAMA. Get it?
Finally, I don't need to "tell the future", all I have to do is look at Romney's record to know he is not a Constitutional champion. On the other hand, you are supporting Romney based on what you HOPE he will do once he gets into office, rather than basing your support on the tangible facts of his background.
This is called 'stupidity'.
written by Kay Bell , June 18, 2012
I strongly urge all to go to this web page and listen to the full interview in the link and also view all information below. This is the best argument against voting for either of the two evils that I have ever heard. Worth the read and well worth the listen.
Why Christians and Conservatives Sense that Romney Could Be Worse Than Obama
http://www.theconservativepundit.net/?p=892
written by Stephan Jerde , June 19, 2012
@howiem
"You seem to omit that people do not try to get venture capital unless they are in trouble and need money."
That's not how VC works. The people at the VC firm are very experienced at poking holes through non-viable business plans. People "in trouble" get weeded out in the very first round of due diligence.
VC firms are only successful in attracting investors if they prove they are successful in picking winners.
written by Graham Dugas , July 14, 2012
Painting with a very broad, and admittedly sloppy brush, We can observe that the Japanese were able to seize huge share of the auto market in the early 70’s in the aftermath of the [engineered] Arab oil embargo. The American makers were large, full of inertia, unresponsive, dull of vision, prideful and slaves to quarterly earnings reports whereas the Japanese were famous for 5yr and even 10yr planning. They would willingly take huge losses for several quarters in a row as they built factories for the long term filled with robots that could adapt to making several different model cars with very little trouble and down time as they changed tooling on the line. Thus they were adaptive and better able to respond to the market. They were very forward thinking. A whole host of books came out at the time detailing this paradigm on the business circuit. In many ways the Americans have never recovered The best we could do was to get the Japanese to build cars over here. The Americans were slaves to the next quarterly earnings reports and it became our undoing. The unions didn’t help either.
Applied to politics it goes like this… the false left/right narrative is dictates the following “Democrats are evil and Republicans are the cure”. The inverse narrative is used for liberals. “Republicans are evil and Democrats are the cure”. Even diehard liberals see Obama/Kerry/Clinton as less than ideal but they aren’t as bad as Bush/Dole/McCain whoever. They are unhappy with the system too. Remember even their sainted Clinton signed the “anti-gay” DOMA and welfare reform and many aren’t happy with Obama record on civil liberties and the wars.
What is needed is a view longer than one term. The Japanese willingly took losses for long periods and several quarterly reporting periods as they retooled and invested for the long haul. What we need to do is punish the Establishment Parties with endless losses until they put forth (or rather stop blocking) honest freedom loving candidates. We need to go elsewhere as a voting block for as many cycles as it takes until they learn the lesson. We need to see beyond the immediate and the urgent. What good is another profitable quarter if we will have zero market share in five years? What good is another RINO if we go off the cliff in five years rather than four years and eleven months with a Democrat?
I admit that this argument has only been persuasive once or twice in the hundred times I used it when I was talking to business men. I further admit it needs development. But it does persuade some people upon occasion and for that I offer it up. I invite the readers here to develop and hone the general thrust of this thinking and rework it until it is greatly improved. Let’s see your ideas in the forum. Let’s see “open source” beta-testing in action. I look forward to your views.
Like most fully logical things, even if it were perfected, it would still fail to persuade many given the prevalence and strength of the left/right lesser evil delusion. But it may get one or two along the way. Despise not the day of small beginnings.
written by Denver , August 12, 2012
There can be no doubt. The supposed dichotomy between dems and gop is false. Don't believe me? When was the last time a GOP presidential candidate had to eschew abortion, for instance? Before running, or while in office, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush, Dole, Mclame and Romney, and their wives, were pro abortion. Gun control? Nixon Reagan and Bush signed gun control measures while pResident. Nixon wanted to give us Universal Healthcare.
GOP, Democrat. A difference that makes no difference is no difference.
The game (presidential elections) is rigged, has been since Eisenhower. The politicians (though not necessarily the pResidential candidate) only care about maintaining the Party's power to enrichen and empower, their chosen favorites, and themselves.
A pox on all their houses (and those that vote for them). Continue to be fooled only the nation is at stake.
written by tuckchristine , August 28, 2012
My vote will not be thrown away. I will vote my conscience. I will vote according to principle. I will vote for moral value. I will vote with the Constitution and the founding fathers in mind. And I know in my heart that my vote will not be lost. My vote will forever be in my heart knowing I did the right thing. I will be writing Ron Paul in.
written by PhoenixRising , October 01, 2012
Here's a good look at what both parties have done to public school education...Please share widely http://www.scribd.com/doc/1063...O-ACTIVISM
written by ThatGuy , October 15, 2012
"It relies on a very dangerous assumption; that one can somehow quantify which candidate is going to hurt the country less."
While I agree that choosing the lesser of two evils does nothing but stagnate the evolution of a society, I have a problem with this argument. Assuming that it is impossible - or naive - to try to quantify the negative and positive effects of any of the candidates, how is this any different from claiming that we should choose neither of them? To not choose one, for any reason, seems to me as being based on the exact same assumption: that in order to be able to see how wrong one candidate is and how good another is, one must be able to assume some sort of quantification of their effects. Otherwise, how could we conclude that both are evil?
written by Brandon Smith , January 06, 2013
@Thatguy
Your position is a bit ridiculous. I am talking about those who try to make hypothetical quantifications on how each candidate might be worse than the other IN THE FUTURE, and how this is impossible. On the other hand, it is easy to quantify how each candidate is corrupt TODAY. Get it?
Being able to tally the criminality of two men in the present is not the same as claiming to be able to tally how one might be worse than the other in the future.
This is not difficult. You are being confused by your own silly mental gymnastics.
Write comment
