The
John Adams Society
March 2008
“Our principles were high, and very
definite. We were not a party; we had no candidates; we had no axes to grind.
Our vote laid upon the man we cast it for no obligation of any kind. By our
rule we could not ask for office; we could not accept office. When voting, it
was our duty to vote for the best man, regardless of his party name. We had no
other creed. Vote for the best man--that was creed enough.”
Mark Twain
Voting, that
sacred right, is
the method by which We The People give legitimacy to
our government. In exchange for the
opportunity to vote for the candidate of their choice, the citizenry agrees to allow
itself to be governed by those elected. Typically,
these elections result in a slight reshuffling of the political landscape – one
party gaining in its ranks another losing.
However, sometimes the results are quite lopsided. The mid-term federal elections of 2006
illustrate how elected officials respond to a perceived ‘mandate’ from the
voters. The Democratic leadership, newly
armed with a majority in both the House and Senate, set out to push through
legislation to support their party platform and deliver on campaign promises…
as they should. That is the way the
system works; the winners call the shots.
And for the voters who supported them, there is much celebrating.
However, for Conservatives, there has
not been much to celebrate. Over the last 20 years, with
‘hold-your-nose-and-pull-the-lever’ support from this group, the Republican Party
has churned out, elected, and reelected, candidates that stray ever and ever
further from the party platform and the principles of its conservative base. Judging from such recent events as the McCain
nomination, the floating of Pawlenty for VP, and the
begging by the party for Ramstad to run again, it appears there’s no change in
that course. Just as the ‘mandate’
empowered the Democrats to run rampant with their agenda, the Republicans, or for
that matter, any other party that deviates from its slated purpose, needs to
lose, and lose big. It’s time for
conservatives to thumb their nose and not pull the lever.
On the other
hand,
as the saying goes, “Why cut off your nose to spite your face?” Surely, there many who may disagree on some
points with their party’s candidates, but which is worse, your party’s candidate
or the opposition’s? To abstain from
voting is a vote for those you favor least.
And besides, if you are not happy with your party’s selection of a
nominee, you must be in the minority, for evidently there were more people who did
approve of the selection. So be happy
that you have a candidate with at least some chance of winning. Behind the curtain, you will do the right
thing.
The Chairman, who believes that voting, like a fine
wine, is wasted on those who don’t know the difference, has called for a debate
to settle the question:
Resolved: Don't Vote; You'll Only Encourage Them
The Debate will be held on