Monday, October 22, 2012

Pragmatism vs. Principle: What To Do With Mitt

As much as I want Øbama defeated, I cannot vote for the other guy.

I won't compromise my principles.

Food for thought:
Some of us have resigned ourselves to the now-cliché "lesser of two evils" rationalization and are planning to support Romney for purely pragmatic reasons: "Obama's got to go, and Mitt is our only realistic hope of stopping the radical communist." Some of us instead are third-party supporters who are aligned with someone like Ron Paul (as a write-in), Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party, or Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party, in the hope of influencing public policy (if not the outcome of the election itself). And some of us are platform-minded Republicans who support the unifying published principles of the GOP, but can't tolerate the thought of voting for Mitt Romney — who is arguably the most liberal-socialistic (not to mention opportunistic) Republican nominee ever, despite his feigned conservatism, and who, by the way, has distanced himself from the party platform.

A lot has been said about the two "evils" these "twin-party" choices pose for moral conservatives. Obama is obviously disqualified for his Marxist/Islamist/destroy-America agenda, likely to play out to a catastrophic conclusion if he's re-elected — that is, if God doesn't intervene in our hour of extreme need and spare our nation from Obama's evil designs.

For his part, Romney is unqualified for a long list of reasons that make voting for him problematic for anyone determined to do the right thing this election. More on that in a moment.
Read the rest here.


  1. Well if mr. holier than thou thinks Romney is a bad choice in Gods eye he may as well vote for Obutwipe. Because a vote for any other than Romney is a vote for Oblunder.I really dont want the civil unrest an Oblamer win would bring.Give it time...the tea party will hold Romney accountable

  2. One can pontificate and preen all they want about principles, Romney's
    vacillation and how voting for the third party "makes a statement".

    However...the cold hard nasty truth of the matter is very very very very
    simple. On Nov 7 either Obama or Romney will have won the election. All
    the rest of that "dancing on the head of a pin" bullshit about principles
    really won't matter in the cold harsh daylight of reality.

    Folks...the choices are simple. Vote for Romney and hope that all those
    bad feelings about him are at least partly wrong or watch Obama win a
    second and quite possibly final term in the office. Just like Ross Perot
    fucked GHW Bush in 92 and got us Slick Willie Clinton and Hitlery elected
    votes for RP, or some other third party hurt ONLY the GOP not Socialists.

  3. All this pontificating about how we better vote for Obamney or the Kenyan will stay in power is funny, considering we the people don't decide who is president anyway.

    Oh, and 'throwing away my vote'? Yeah right. If I vote for someone who I do NOT support, then THAT would be throwing away my vote.

    'If you vote for anyone other than Trotsky, then Lenin will stay in power. A vote for a non Communist or non socialist is just throwing away your vote.'

    Anyway, folks have been voting for the lesser of two evils for a long time. How's that been working out for ya'll?

    I am POSITIVE Diebold will take due notice of your lesser of two evils vote.

    Me? I am definitely not wasting my vote. I'm voting with my wallet.

  4. "the tea party will hold Romney accountable "

    Yeah, they've been doing a bang up job of holding gov't folks accountable. [/snark]

  5. "the tea party will hold Romney accountable"

    now that's some funny shit, right there!

    I will not be voting for anyone.