by: douglas v. gibbs | published: 06 17, 2012
In a perfect world there would be no political parties. The voters would care less about political affiliations, and vote for the candidate they felt best reflected their beliefs, and were most willing to follow the authorities granted by the Law of the Land. Polls would be trustworthy, and politicians would act as servants to the people, not rulers over them.
Welcome to reality.
As the old joke goes, the best way you can tell if a politician is lying is if their lips are moving. Political leaders fight for position for the purpose of gaining more power and prestige. They lie, cheat, sling propaganda, and act in ways best for them, rather than what is best for the country.
A two-party system dominates our political environment, and the corrupt inner-workings of the establishment in both parties mirror each other. Representatives are expected to tow the party line. Deviance is unacceptable, and the offender is punished by being shut out of committees, and the like.
When it comes to the voters, whenever one votes outside the party, it splits the vote, and puts the opposition into power. Many of the voters are purists, and are frustrated because candidates that wind up available on their ballot don't fully meet the criteria desired. Any candidate that is more to the purist's liking is beat down by the establishment and media, and never seems to be able to gain any kind of traction.
The polls are untrustworthy, and the media is worse. The uninformed electorate is easily manipulated by a whole mess of dirty politics, and filthy campaigns of personal destruction. Reality makes it difficult to remain optimistic. It is as if the whole dang world of politics is filled with corruption and money chasers.
The reality of the rules of the game requires that we play the game of politics. The rules need to be changed, but right now they are what we have to work with. We cannot always achieve a pure and perfect political candidate. For conservatives, that often means supporting a center-right candidate that may be closer to the center than one desires.
Rand Paul understands the game.
Dr. Paul more or less tossed an endorsement in the direction of Mitt Romney. He conceded that his father, Ron Paul, could not win the nomination, and in the face of a raging Marxist in the White House, he threw his support behind the next best thing. Romney is far from the perfect candidate. During the primaries I did not give him any support, throwing my hopes behind the more conservative, and more constitutional, candidates. But, now that it looks like Romney will be the GOP nomination, I face a stark realization that no third candidate has a snowball's chance in Hell to pull off a win. Therefore, I have a choice. Do I vote for the Marxist Alinskyite that currently resides in the White House, or do I vote for the slightly flawed capitalist?
I will take a capitalist over a socialist any day of the week.
Rand Paul understands the necessity of getting Barack Obama, and the hard left liberal democrats, out of Washington. The policies of these people are destructive, and they are using every dirty means they can to put their policies in place. Obama has over and over again proven that he believes the Congress should be completely irrelevant, and that the Constitution is simply an obstacle to his quest of fundamentally changing America. His recent unconstitutional action of bypassing Congress to grant Amnesty to a portion of illegal aliens in this country is evidence of that.
The Obama administration has been suing States like Arizona for daring to try to enforce federal laws on the books regarding immigration, which is a concurrent issue. The White House has placed moratoriums on oil drilling, stood in the way of the Keystone pipeline, and has funneled money into green technology like solar companies that have wound up bankrupt, and mysteriously have connections to the Obama administration - then Obama complains that we need to get off foreign oil.
The democrats have proven to be the enemy of this nation's sovereignty, and the enemy of States' Rights. They dabble with treaties that would give the United Nations control over our national sovereignty, and treaties that take away States' Rights and personal, individual liberties (including parental rights).
In the face of this kind of catastrophe, should we risk allowing Obama to remain in office by voting for a third party candidate because Romney isn't as pure as the wind-driven snow as far as conservatism is concerned?
The problem is not whether or not the people we put into office is pure, or not, but that we don't make sure they act as we expect. We have stopped being involved, we have stopped holding their feet to the fire, and we keep voting in power-hungry knuckleheads at the local level.
As long as we keep voting in the wrong people locally, what makes us think the right people will run for office nationally?
Do you know the name of at least one person on your city council? Who's your mayor? Is your city bowing down to the dastardly international plan of sustainable development through Agenda 21? Do you even know what Agenda 21 is in the first place? What kind of property rights are being dashed away by conservationism? What is the name of your representative in your State Legislature? What is their voting record like?
We demand purity, yet we are unwilling to know anything about the people we put into power.
If we fail to work locally, we deserve what we get nationally.
When playing politics, the kind of candidates available are a direct result of the efforts we put into the game. Then, when the vote comes, we better be ready to vote for what is preferable, even if the candidate does not meet our criteria of perfection. We get what we deserve because we refuse to be active from start to finish.
Would I prefer a more conservative candidate than Mitt Romney? Sure. But we can't afford another four years of Obama, so I will vote for Mitt, and continue to work locally so that next time my President is someone a little more like me, and less like the usual political money men that have been playing the power game in Washington since before I was born.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Rand Paul Endorses Romney - Politico
Obama Sues Arizona, Gives Sanctuary to Lawbreakers - Human Events
The Obama Moratorium: No Offshore Drilling While He's in Office - Washington Examiner
A Massive Land and Water Grab - Canada Free Press
Senator DeMint Warns of Hidden Threat to American Sovereignty. . . Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) - Patriot Action Network
The U.N. Rights of the Child Treaty Will Substitute the State for the Parent - Independent Sentinel
add a comment
The Tennessee Republican Assembly Joins Resolution Against Sen Alexander's National Internet Sales Tax Mandate
03 31, 2013
05 29, 2011
05 29, 2011
05 13, 2011
05 13, 2011
by: j. grant swank, jr | 07, 01 2008
by: warner todd huston | 04, 26 2010
by: alan caruba | 07, 04 2010
by: douglas v. gibbs | 08, 31 2008
by: jb williams | 05, 19 2013