I voted against both of them. It wasn't an abstention, it was an informed expression of my preference for the office. Don't try and tell me it's impossible for my candidate to win; that's something of a self-fulfilling prophesy. When the base of the third parties abandons them in some attempt at strategery, can we really be surprised when they don't do well?
When you vote for unacceptable candidates just because they're offered, you will continue to be offered unacceptable candidates. I imagine we'll have this same discussion in four years.
And doing the "stand-down" of this election accomplishes exactly what? Maintains idealogical purity? And where exactly does that get you? And how long do you think it will be before the wrongs which will be jammed down our throats can be corrected, if at all? I guess the old saw about "the perfect is the enemy of the good" has never occurred to you who choose to sit it out. JFC. Grow Up! Sorry Kevin.
I mentioned earlier that the choice before us was to accept or reject a Rousseaunian future, which is a separate matter from accepting or rejecting a Lockean future.
I went on to explain that for those of us seeking to (re) erect Locke, it is a necessary step to reject Rousseau, but that this step wasn't sufficient in and of itself to restore Locke.
Without that rejection, the opportunity to select Locke cannot occur.
Apparently, some of us weren't listening.
A similar dynamic exists when selecting a spouse from the finite list of people that one knows. You must first actively separate them into to rough piles, "suitable", and "unsuitable". Failure to reject the unsuitable virtually guarantees that your life will be long and miserable.
Whether you live in misery or make some companionable happiness with a good match, nobody gets the dream girl, because she just doesn't (usually) exist.
Frankly, this is one of those times where you need just need to grab an oar and help row.
I still fall back on the basic premise that if you do not vote then you had better make an effort to advance another candidate or philosophy. I mean actually get something published outside of a blog or actually, at least, go out there (online, I suppose) and try and convince people of why their opinions are right or wrong.
Because otherwise you're not doing anything, and you are, in effect, making a decision for things to do what they have always done. Inactivity allows entropy.
Making a conscious decision to do nothing is still doing nothing. You're just reversing the usual order of action / rationalization for this case.
Doing nothing gives the status quo your stamp of approval. You'll also be responsible for the results. What did sitting out the '92 election or voting for Perot give you? Where did that get us? Many unintended consequences not the least of which was 9/11.
"Doing nothing gives the status quo your stamp of approval. You'll also be responsible for the results. What did sitting out the '92 election or voting for Perot give you? Where did that get us? Many unintended consequences not the least of which was 9/11. "
I didn't vote for Bush 41 in '92 - I hated the elitist, lying, back-stabbing SOB. Fat lot of good THAT did - we got Brady and the AWB, plus yet higher tax rates in return. In retrospect, I got suckered into not voting Bush then because of my naivete. I wanted to "send a message" to the Republican leadership.
Message sent? Check.
Message received? I dunno, maybe. Message listened to and acted upon? No f'ing way.
Oh, and part of the stripping away of my naivete was the belief that it was easy to toss out a screw-up of an incumbant. Not so if he has any charisma, and can lie like nobody's business. Some dumb hick Clinton turned out to be.
Well, I'll never make that mistake again. First, stop catastrophe (driving off a cliff, for example), then worry about changing the idiot driving the bus, or the route. First live, then worry about what your true preferences may be.
I just hope that if That One gets in (I REFUSE to say "if he's elected" because of all the fraud), we actually get a free and reasonably fair chance to try to toss his party out in 2 years and him out in 4. If fear we may not - hence my voting to avoid a catastrophe (i.e. McStain, as much as I despise him on many issues). At least he is clearly a patriot, if a somewhat misguided and ill-informed one on issues of ideology.
Does there need to be any more evidence for how far gone we are, than people who seem to understand the principles of individual rights and limited government, begging for others to vote for someone slightly less of a socialist. It's not like I'm going to be part of the 3% who thinks they can shoot their way into a new American Revolution - that's idealism in the other extreme. What's wrong with acknowledging and accepting reality - the people want socialism, the Constitution has long been ignored, and politics (at least at the federal level, to be generous) is an immoral game to see who can take what from others. It's easy to make fun of those who stand by their principles, but really now, do you folk who will vote have any left at all?
In 2004, it was a choice between a wedgie and castration. In 2008, it's a choice between disaster and catastrophe. What are we going to be faced with in 2012, a choice between catastrophe and apocalypse?
I voted for McCain last week, but feel really crappy about it. Please, Eagle, explain to me how the GOP is not going to continue its downward slide if we keep electing RINOs?
Maybe someone could explain it to me how the election of an out-and-out socialist is better than the election of a RINO? How does it benefit our cause and teach a lesson that may take years to undo, if it can be done at all? Remember, its not just legislation from Congress we have to try to stop, it is two and perhaps three lifetime USSC justices who can shape our legal system by fiat (witness KELO decision) which is at stake in this election.
The clearest parallel is the argument between a legal CCW permit issued by the state and those who insist by virtue of idealogical purity that we need no permit at all. Remember that we can only move the ball incrementally. Three yards and a cloud of dust. There is NFW we can have everything we as conservatives/ libertarians would want all at once. The believe otherwise is delusional. You can live in a fantasy world in which everything should be perfect, but that idea falls prey to the same school of thought that our liberal opponents have in terms of thinking they can change human nature. Ain't. Gonna. Happen.
So, do we act like adults.....try to persuade others through reasoned argument, or do we pick up our ball and go home to pout?
If you aren't happy with the direction the party is going, join your local party and recruit your like-minded friends too. Nobody said it was easy.
Just get involved and hope, that's the plan? Hope is what people cling to when there's nothing else left. Your response convinces me that no one has any clear idea how we're going to get the GOP back on track if McCain wins.
I plan to get involved whatever the outcome of the election, but the only real chance I see of purging the GOP ranks of the RINOs and the dead wood is for the socialist to win. There is little doubt that four years of Obama will be a nightmare. In the end it will either put America's decline on the fast track or it will allow people like us to make a genuine case for freedom, to make it really new and appealing to all ages and classes.
I just hope that if That One gets in (I REFUSE to say "if he's elected" because of all the fraud), we actually get a free and reasonably fair chance to try to toss his party out in 2 years and him out in 4.
Oh fergawdsakes, this sounds like the leftie whining of the last 8 years - will Bush allow himself to be voted out, he really wants to be a dictator, he stole the election, etc.
Note:
All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost;
references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>
JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2008/11/quote-of-day_03.html (15 comments)
Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.
"if you chose not to decide, you still have made a choice."
Channeling Rush, I see...One of my favorite bands. Saw them in May - amazing
Yeah, I don't think I'm going to vote for president. There is just no compelling candidate any more.
I voted against both of them. It wasn't an abstention, it was an informed expression of my preference for the office. Don't try and tell me it's impossible for my candidate to win; that's something of a self-fulfilling prophesy. When the base of the third parties abandons them in some attempt at strategery, can we really be surprised when they don't do well?
When you vote for unacceptable candidates just because they're offered, you will continue to be offered unacceptable candidates. I imagine we'll have this same discussion in four years.
It's not "choosing not to decide" it's "choosing not to participate in the immoral process".
And doing the "stand-down" of this election accomplishes exactly what? Maintains idealogical purity? And where exactly does that get you? And how long do you think it will be before the wrongs which will be jammed down our throats can be corrected, if at all? I guess the old saw about "the perfect is the enemy of the good" has never occurred to you who choose to sit it out. JFC. Grow Up! Sorry Kevin.
Eagle 1
I mentioned earlier that the choice before us was to accept or reject a Rousseaunian future, which is a separate matter from accepting or rejecting a Lockean future.
I went on to explain that for those of us seeking to (re) erect Locke, it is a necessary step to reject Rousseau, but that this step wasn't sufficient in and of itself to restore Locke.
Without that rejection, the opportunity to select Locke cannot occur.
Apparently, some of us weren't listening.
A similar dynamic exists when selecting a spouse from the finite list of people that one knows. You must first actively separate them into to rough piles, "suitable", and "unsuitable". Failure to reject the unsuitable virtually guarantees that your life will be long and miserable.
Whether you live in misery or make some companionable happiness with a good match, nobody gets the dream girl, because she just doesn't (usually) exist.
Frankly, this is one of those times where you need just need to grab an oar and help row.
I still fall back on the basic premise that if you do not vote then you had better make an effort to advance another candidate or philosophy. I mean actually get something published outside of a blog or actually, at least, go out there (online, I suppose) and try and convince people of why their opinions are right or wrong.
Because otherwise you're not doing anything, and you are, in effect, making a decision for things to do what they have always done. Inactivity allows entropy.
Making a conscious decision to do nothing is still doing nothing. You're just reversing the usual order of action / rationalization for this case.
Doing nothing gives the status quo your stamp of approval. You'll also be responsible for the results. What did sitting out the '92 election or voting for Perot give you? Where did that get us? Many unintended consequences not the least of which was 9/11.
Own the results.
Eagle 1
"Doing nothing gives the status quo your stamp of approval. You'll also be responsible for the results. What did sitting out the '92 election or voting for Perot give you? Where did that get us? Many unintended consequences not the least of which was 9/11. "
I didn't vote for Bush 41 in '92 - I hated the elitist, lying, back-stabbing SOB. Fat lot of good THAT did - we got Brady and the AWB, plus yet higher tax rates in return. In retrospect, I got suckered into not voting Bush then because of my naivete. I wanted to "send a message" to the Republican leadership.
Message sent? Check.
Message received? I dunno, maybe. Message listened to and acted upon? No f'ing way.
Oh, and part of the stripping away of my naivete was the belief that it was easy to toss out a screw-up of an incumbant. Not so if he has any charisma, and can lie like nobody's business. Some dumb hick Clinton turned out to be.
Well, I'll never make that mistake again. First, stop catastrophe (driving off a cliff, for example), then worry about changing the idiot driving the bus, or the route. First live, then worry about what your true preferences may be.
I just hope that if That One gets in (I REFUSE to say "if he's elected" because of all the fraud), we actually get a free and reasonably fair chance to try to toss his party out in 2 years and him out in 4. If fear we may not - hence my voting to avoid a catastrophe (i.e. McStain, as much as I despise him on many issues). At least he is clearly a patriot, if a somewhat misguided and ill-informed one on issues of ideology.
Does there need to be any more evidence for how far gone we are, than people who seem to understand the principles of individual rights and limited government, begging for others to vote for someone slightly less of a socialist. It's not like I'm going to be part of the 3% who thinks they can shoot their way into a new American Revolution - that's idealism in the other extreme. What's wrong with acknowledging and accepting reality - the people want socialism, the Constitution has long been ignored, and politics (at least at the federal level, to be generous) is an immoral game to see who can take what from others. It's easy to make fun of those who stand by their principles, but really now, do you folk who will vote have any left at all?
In 2004, it was a choice between a wedgie and castration. In 2008, it's a choice between disaster and catastrophe. What are we going to be faced with in 2012, a choice between catastrophe and apocalypse?
I voted for McCain last week, but feel really crappy about it. Please, Eagle, explain to me how the GOP is not going to continue its downward slide if we keep electing RINOs?
I'm not rejecting the imperfect. I'm rejecting the unacceptable. There's a difference.
Maybe someone could explain it to me how the election of an out-and-out socialist is better than the election of a RINO? How does it benefit our cause and teach a lesson that may take years to undo, if it can be done at all? Remember, its not just legislation from Congress we have to try to stop, it is two and perhaps three lifetime USSC justices who can shape our legal system by fiat (witness KELO decision) which is at stake in this election.
The clearest parallel is the argument between a legal CCW permit issued by the state and those who insist by virtue of idealogical purity that we need no permit at all. Remember that we can only move the ball incrementally. Three yards and a cloud of dust. There is NFW we can have everything we as conservatives/ libertarians would want all at once. The believe otherwise is delusional. You can live in a fantasy world in which everything should be perfect, but that idea falls prey to the same school of thought that our liberal opponents have in terms of thinking they can change human nature. Ain't. Gonna. Happen.
So, do we act like adults.....try to persuade others through reasoned argument, or do we pick up our ball and go home to pout?
If you aren't happy with the direction the party is going, join your local party and recruit your like-minded friends too. Nobody said it was easy.
Eagle 1
Eagle,
Just get involved and hope, that's the plan? Hope is what people cling to when there's nothing else left. Your response convinces me that no one has any clear idea how we're going to get the GOP back on track if McCain wins.
I plan to get involved whatever the outcome of the election, but the only real chance I see of purging the GOP ranks of the RINOs and the dead wood is for the socialist to win. There is little doubt that four years of Obama will be a nightmare. In the end it will either put America's decline on the fast track or it will allow people like us to make a genuine case for freedom, to make it really new and appealing to all ages and classes.
I just hope that if That One gets in (I REFUSE to say "if he's elected" because of all the fraud), we actually get a free and reasonably fair chance to try to toss his party out in 2 years and him out in 4.
Oh fergawdsakes, this sounds like the leftie whining of the last 8 years - will Bush allow himself to be voted out, he really wants to be a dictator, he stole the election, etc.
Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>