Monday, May 14, 2012

The perfect political candidate is a fiction

As mentioned many times in my blog, I measure political candidates against the Constitution and the principles of liberty expressed in our founding documents. I've been voting since 1968 and in all those years, can't think of a single candidate who measured up. But it is always fairly easy to determine which candidate is worse then the other. Some say one should always vote only for the perfect candidate. The perfect candidate is extremely rare. When he runs, he is more rarely in a position to win. So, I've cast many votes where I had to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two (or more) evils. (Why is it that the Left never seems to have to choose between the lesser of two evils?)

Back in 2007-8, I compared all the aspirants to the US presidency against the US Constitution. I found most to be lacking -- some more than others. Near the bottom of my list were Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Somewhere in the middle were Mitt Romney, John McCain, Bob Barr, Fred Thompson, and Rudy Giuliani. My top choices, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, dropped out early in the race.

Unlike millions of American voters. I never cast my vote based on political party affiliation, religion, or race. Like Martin Luther King, Jr. I believe that one should "not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." In making my choices, I seek more reliable sources of news and information than labor unions (I am a 25-year union member), Hollywood, Bill Maher or David Letterman monologues, and mainstream "news."

One such source is a radio program by Tom Gresham called GunTalk. The main focus is fairly obvious: guns and gun rights. Its topics often address the Constitution and liberty in general. A recent caller to his show lamented the fact that his preferred candidate, Dr. Ron Paul, is not the Republican front-runner. The caller said he'll sit out this election because his perfect candidate won't be on the ballot. Tom tried to convince the caller that not voting is akin to a vote for the candidate he least likes (in this case, Obama).

Today, I read an article which seems tailor-made for such persons who pout or who consider themselves too pure to vote for the "lesser of two evils."

In part, the article says,
"The Obama campaign knows that one of the reasons President Obama won in 2008 was that from 2004 to 2008 between 3 million and 4 million Republicans decided to stay home and did not vote. As Obama won several states by razor-thin margins and as his campaign knows he is suffering from an "enthusiasm gap" from some of his previous supporters, they are going to need to suppress the Romney vote in 2012."

In 2008, there were several candidates I would have preferred over John McCain. But, McCain was the only person in position to beat Obama. I held my nose and voted for McCain. Millions who should have voted, stayed home or voted for a non-viable candidate from a fringe political party. Those people gave us Obama. They could have overridden the votes of those who voted solely based on skin pigmentation.

This year, we have exactly the same scenario: Although I am Mormon, Mitt Romney, the apparent winner of the GOP presidential race, is far down my list of presidential candidates because of some of his past decisions which are inconsistent with my Mormon faith and my liberty. I will [shudder] hold my nose when I vote for him. Why? Because Romney is the only candidate with a chance of beating Obama and he respects the Constitution much more than does Obama. Romney needs the vote and enthusiastic support of every American who loves liberty. And, we who love liberty need Romney to win. The alternative is far worse and will adversely affect us for decades -- perhaps forever. Obama, his political appointees, and his judicial nominees are accelerating the damage done to the Constitution and to liberty by the misnamed progressive movement (found in varying degrees in both major political parties) over the past 100+ years. That damage must be reversed! Will Romney make that reversal? I don't feel particularly confident. But, I do believe that he will at least slow that damage. He may be, in my opinion, the lesser of two evils; but he is not the worst of two evils.

Another reason informed voters must not stay home: Congress. Those who would vote against Obama would likely also vote against other anti-liberty politicians who are up for reelection this year. The nation needs a pro-Constitution, pro-liberty Congress to hold Romney to his Conservative promises.

The Left (Ecclesiastes 10:2) is counting on the rest of us to stay home and pout as in 2008. The Left also is counting on its constituency to vote based on the same criteria as in 2008 -- anti-Republican comedy skits, race, and party affiliation -- not an understanding of facts. We must disappoint the Left!