Peroutka for President: Constitution Party (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 23, 2024, 04:59:16 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  Peroutka for President: Constitution Party (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Peroutka for President: Constitution Party  (Read 3334 times)
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« on: May 04, 2004, 12:39:01 PM »

Normally, I would say that a vote for any fringe candidate is a vote for your opponent, although Nader was an exception--Nader's supporters would not have voted at all if he weren't on the ballot.

But, somehow, these bitter reactionary fringe candidates annoy me most of all. First of all, they have cockeyed goals: No one sitting on the Supreme Court will be impeached. The UN will not vacate its Manhattan property. There will always be a China.

Secondly, even with their frankly stupid suppositions, the Peroutkavites have no political talent to effect even one of their more realistic goals. Has any member of this tin-foil brigade even made one minor improvement to our society?  

What minor accompishments to our society that have been made have been the result of "liberal", "Democrat-lite" Republicans: Partial-birth abortion ban (Henry Hyde and Rick Santorum), cutting out public-sector union waste (Gov. Schwartzenegger), defending the 5000-year-old definition of marriage (Gov Romney), or reducing the claques of Islamic terrorists who want to kill us all (President Bush)?

And Roy Moore's accomplishment: getting disbarred from the **Alabama** State Supreme Court for not removing a hunk of stone from a courthouse.

Thirdly, the Buchananistas have a greater faith in government than any French communist does. According to their logic, if only we elect Peroutka, or Moore, or Browne, or whomever, we will elect a government that will return to a Golden Age of consitutionalist virtue.

No true conservative could believe that through government action (or inaction), we can return to a golden anything. That utopian nonsense comes straight from the French revolution and Napoleon. Not to mention, the Constitution is a legal document that defines (in part) the powers of the central state vis-a-vis the federal states and the American citizenry. It is NOT SCRIPTURE! Following its precepts to the letter will not make Americans or their goverment more moral! Only His Holy Spirit can do that.

That late 18th century American colonial society produced men of vision and heart like Jefferson, Adams, and (my favorite) Washington was the singular combination of English traditionalism and devout Christian faith--even Jefferson recommended giving free Bibles to poor schoolchildren. None of those men had any of the superstitious faith in the wonder-working miracles of the Constitution than any modern-day Peroutkavite has.






Logged
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2004, 05:21:43 PM »
« Edited: May 05, 2004, 05:25:13 PM by Storebought »

As inaccurate as this is, my best friend in college told me, point-blank, that he would not have voted if Nader weren't on the ballot. Likewise: If Cheney (or Powell) had been the Republican nominee in 2000, I certainly would not have registered Republican, and I probably wouldn't have voted, either. Sometimes, people actually /do/ vote for the candidate, and not the Party, even in the case of poor battered Ralph Nader.

And, no, I absolutely do not advocate theocracy!! I said that a change in America's moral climate will come with a resurgence of Christianity among its people, NOT by scrapping the Constitution or the wholesale deconstruction of the Federal Government to make Christianity "the state religion."

It's a shame, though, that merely mentioning Christianity automatically means advocating a New World Taliban.. :-(
Logged
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2004, 06:24:19 PM »

Can you simply not admit that, among those 2.8 million, at least some fraction of them went for Nader because he was Ralph Nader and not Al Gore or George Bush?

Partisan Democrats may be loathe to admit the fact, but Al Gore STUNK as a candidate and STINKS as a human being (else why would he have hired Naomi Wolf as an image consultant). I can easily believe that leftists who were (rightly) disgusted at Gore's lack of integrity may have been attracted to Nader for Nader's integrity.

And among those surveys showing "buyer's remorse" among some Green Party voters: Well, hindsight is always 20-20, and now far leftists who went with Nader are regretting their choice.  Let's play our tiny violins for them...

Not to mention: Virtually all post-election exit polls show major changes from the November vote tally. Usually, more people say they voted for the winning candidate than what actually occurred. In this case, far leftists are deflecting blame for Gore's defeat by bleating that "If only Nader weren't on the ballot...blah...blah..."

Human beings naturally search for a scapegoat for their guilt. In this case, an elderly Lebanese Socialist is their pick.

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 15 queries.