Dobson is Right
Controversy erupted after more than 50 pro-family leaders met in Salt Lake City on September 30th and resolved almost unanimously to support “third-party” candidates if the convictions of neither Republicans nor Democrats fell in line with theirs. To some, this stance seemed like political heresy and the event was quickly condemned. The worst condemnations came from people who thought the whole idea dishonest. Certainly they know that lack of support for Republicans will increase the chances that Democrats will win – a worse fate. The resolution must be a trick.
We have followed that reasoning for generations with little to no mechanism to bring the parties closer to representing the voters. When it is not an election season, the two parties often enough – proudly – declare “progress” in some area in which they both agree. A series of programs and big spending proposals emerge for which there is no debate. Driven by the money, these programs continue to grow and have offspring with no one objecting to increasingly outrageous justifications; no matter the extent to which new laws overstep constitutional authorities and violate basic rights.
To the two-party loyalists, this doesn’t matter. We could be funding $100 trillion a year to fight a Klingon war in another galaxy. For fear of their technology, the nation could be in complete lock-down, with each individual – even humans – required to justify every movement to a political officer. Reasonable objections, such as that the Klingons are imaginary and that even in the fictional series we are no longer at war with them, would be ignored; as would reasonable questions, such as where does the money actually go and why do I have to defend my behavior when I have done no wrong and present no danger to my fellow citizens? Two-party loyalists would simply point out that the other party’s proposals are somehow even worse.
Our de facto perceived-lesser-of-two-evils political system has already led to the abrogation of constitutional rights, the end of the institution of family, and the criminalization of fatherhood, as some of its most visible results. It has been the Bill of Rights – rather than limitations on party power sharing – the limits against intrusion and arbitrary manipulation by government that has made the country stable and strong. With each generation there is “bi-partisan” support for continued erosion of those limitations, and that trend has accelerated dramatically within the last few decades. Just a few generations more and we will be fighting a Klingon war.
To defend ourselves and our nation, we must see the basic political question for what it is. Do you want to live in a democracy with rights and freedoms protected – or not? If you answer that you do; then you must recognize what the opposition is. The opposition is the belief that voting in accordance with one’s beliefs is political heresy.
| More from Roger F. Gay
Stumble It!
October 17th, 2007 at 4:25 am
We the People had better wise up and do whats right….. And that is to replace every person in Washington with new blood, people under at least fifty to 55 yrs old.
Most up there are past retirement age and should “be retired” they dont represent the people.
We need to put in a third
October 17th, 2007 at 4:31 am
Sidenote: Just discovered that Dobson is now making strong statements against abandonment of the two-party system – apparently expressing a personal view opposing the the resolution he signed onto. Oh well – the point of the article is still valid even though the title has become wrong.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:44 am
Dobson must’ve got some cash or something from the RINO’s for him to publicly change his mind so drastically.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:57 am
His statements are still somewhat confusing. He’s saying he is opposed to “starting a third party” but also saying that third parties don’t work. He is also saying that as an individual, rather than representative of his organization, he argued against the “starting a third party.” I’m left wondering whether it’s still valid to talk about the resolution decided by the group, even though a key leader is speaking against it. Might very well be. Reports indicated that the vote for the resolution was “almost” unanimous. 50 organizations represented minus 1 is still a large group of organizations that are willing to support “minor parties” (which is how it is reportedly stated in the resolution).
October 17th, 2007 at 5:23 am
In my mind, we need to vote our conscience. The Republicans we turned to because they espoused support for the nuclear family, smaller gov’t, and low taxes got caught up in their own egos; it was about how important they were, not what they stood for. If Hitlery does win, so what? What will change?
As for me, I’m voting on my principles. Screw the two party two-step. Let’s have a real dance!
October 17th, 2007 at 5:31 am
I don’t see Rudy as a real counter-point to Hillary. I don’t see the Republican Party politicians as counter-point to Democrat Party politicians. All I have to do is think of Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich – weren’t they conservatives? They talked the talk, and did that extremely well, so well that Reagan, the last century’s symbolic conservative, was dubbed “the great communicator.” But in leadership on fundamentals he leaned so far left that I’m surprised he could walk upright. Gingrich used to say he carried a copy of the constitution in his back pocket, and I used to say – take it out and read it sometime.
October 17th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Mrs. Clinton is nothing but a communist femina-nazi. She is incompetent, and only got to the US senate because of her husband. She failed on her attempt at health care long ago and will fail at becoming president. She failed as a lawyer, and failed in her marriage. Her views and wishful policies are juvenile and lack any semblance of intelligence or insightful thought. She is a hack as a senator, and a crackpot as a person.
October 17th, 2007 at 7:53 am
The problem is the fourth branch of government — the Bar Association — which runs the other three in abrogation of the Constitution. The Bar is the only trade association that has no external oversight or regulation. It answers to no one.
This is precisely why both parties end up doing such unexplainable and unexplained things, without debate or discussion, things that bolster powers and income of attorneys at the expense of everyone else.
Pass this in your state if you want to bring the Bar under control. See: HOW TO REFORM THE CORRUPT LEGAL SYSTEM, http://www.newswithviews.com/Usher/david12.htm
October 17th, 2007 at 8:02 am
GreatMRNI; Don’t forget, the left tells us that men of power often stray – it should remind us of JFK. To meet requirements for equality, Hillary will have to have interns under the desk as well – although I’m sure many feminists won’t demand fully reversing the gender roles on that one. (Aarrrgh! Not appealing to the imagination.)
October 17th, 2007 at 8:02 am
Hello David.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:18 am
That is a scary thought, Roger. lol
The most important issue of the 2008 election is insuring that we don’t put a “cackling feminist witch” in the Whitehouse. If you think your balls are in a vise currently, just see what happens if the cackling feminist witch gets control of that lever.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:22 am
But from the standpoint of policy and legislation supported, they’re all crackling feminist witches.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:43 am
That is probably true to some degree, but I think it is a result of ignorance rather than overt malicious intent, which is what most cackling feminist’s witches exhibit.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:47 am
I don’t know. Many statements I’ve heard from Republican politicians over the last decade have seemed pretty crackling.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:27 am
The anti-male bias is so prevalent, that many are victims (including government officials) of the propaganda being spewed. That is not to say all are ignorant, but hopefully most.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:05 am
The word is out now. There is no excuse for not vowing to rid the federal government of anti-father laws and anti-constitutional programs. If they haven’t fixed the problem by November 2008, then they shouldn’t be in office. If a candidate doesn’t vow to fix the problem, they do not deserve anyone’s vote.
October 17th, 2007 at 7:00 pm
I have been intimating a ‘third party’ solution for some time. The ‘Durn Furriner’ Party which will be unattached to popular Nationalist / Ideological notions and re-instate the key elements of the original American Vision for a Nation dedicated to Truth and Justice and the Integrity of the Individual.
At some point, before its time fades away from lack of sustenance, America needs to accept that its consituency is the Western World, not simply Illinois and the Everglades. The Vision was that of Durn Furriner Colonial Brits who could see a better way and fought to create it. In doing so they took over leadership from the Parent country.
The capture of the voter mind so evocatively described by Roger – The Klingon Wars! – is spot on. If we are to prevent the imagination ranging so far into the abyss then we need to turn it to something useful, like the Gnome who will slay the Dragon that David identifies with such ease and accuracy – the legal rent-seekers, parasites, self-interested carrion who are destroying the Vision that the Founding Fathers once enunciated, and the Nation along with it.
Vote #1 Amfortas. Not just any old alternative. The No Alternative, alternative.
October 17th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
OK. Who’s your running mate?