Continued from Dan Phillips' "Biblical Christianity" blog:
4. All third-party candidates are immature, fools, and/or liars. Which, I think, is a minus! At least, it's a fatal flaw in their leadership qualities. How can I make this claim? Because they either know they cannot win and are misleading and misdirecting their supporters and (already!) wasting their money; OR they do not know it, in which case they are hopelessly out-of-touch fools. So they know, for instance, that the two possible candidates differ very sharply on the issue of abortion. They themselves oppose abortion, as does the GOP ticket. So followers who also oppose abortion would naturally vote for the GOP candidate if they had only two choices. But, wrecklessly and egomaniacally, they mislead their followers into thinking that there is a viable third choice. They take the vote that would naturally go to the one pro-life candidate, and turn it into an empty gesture — which benefits the candidate who adores abortion, which they (supposedly) abhor. So they actually help score a touchdown for the other side. Brilliant. Idiots.Ad hominem attacks are so intellectually dishonest, but it's all there's left when there's no sound rational argument to make. No vote is wasted, except the vote for McCain. He's lost my vote with his fascist legislation (McCain-Feingold) and his support for an unconstitutional war. You can talk about his position on abortion, which is dubious due to his support of exceptions, but what about the men and women in the military he would risk? No, I don't support McCain and I'm not voting Obama, but for Chuck Baldwin. There, can I be any clearer than that? And so far as "scoring touchdowns for the other team", the only one I remember reading about was this one.
And here's where Phillips goes really awry. A vote for a candidate is a vote for a candidate, not one that "naturally" would've been expected to go another way. Candidates earn the votes they get, and it's not a zero sum game. The freedom not to vote still exists...for now.
5. I'm a grownup. I want to make a difference, not a gesture. I don't know if there has ever been a more stark nor consequential choice in my lifetime. One candidate has a sterling pro-life voting record, and an even more persuasively pro-life running-mate. The other never met an unborn child he wouldn't just as soon see dead, and even in the most gruesome way imaginable. He thinks spreading abortion is the most important thing he can do. I agree with the former's position, and as a Christian I abominate the latter's. If I do not help the former, I help the latter. Simple as that. I've read hundreds of words from third-partyers. While I share many of their goals, I really think it's all about them. It's about making themselves feel better. Me? I'll feel better if I keep that monstrous, pro-infanticide position out of the White House.This idea that "If I do not help the former, I help the latter." is ridiculous. One minus one doesn't equal two, unless we're talking manipulative fear mongering. And he might think he's keeping a monstrous, pro-infanticide out of the White House, but nothing substantive has been accomplished toward making abortion illegal by voting for the Republicans up to this point. Nothing would change with a McCain administration, and don't expect conservative, strict constructionist judge appointments on the SCOTUS. How many more babies would be spared under a McCain administration than Bush? Voting Republican hasn't moved us even incrementally toward ending abortion, but to a status quo, and that is monstrous. I want to end abortion, and I'm voting with that end in mind.
6. This election will have a huge impact on the state of abortion law. As I've documented repeatedly, Obama is the most viciously merciless and doctrinaire Presidential candidate in history, when it comes to abortion. We've made progress in abortion over the years, and it's made a difference. Thanks to President Bush's appointments, some restrictions have squeaked by the Supreme Court. Now there are 2-3 justices who are about 900 years old who are holding on for a liberal president. You let Obama load the SC and other benches, and you will set the pro-life cause back legally for years. You will hurt every aspect of its public face. And, to be blunt, if you do not vote for John McCain, you are helping Barack Obama.This is just a ridiculous, fear based argument. And again, just like many in Republican party circles, Phillips continues to display his lack of math aptitude. Repeating the same argument doesn't make it any more effective.
The blame for Obama, should he be elected, doesn't lie with people like me who won't vote for McCain, but instead with a Republican party who chose to disdain and ignore Ron Paul for his candidacy. Right now, a Ron Paul candidacy would be trouncing Obama in the polls, even in an election year in which the Democrat is expected to do well against a Republican. The fact that Obama and McCain poll so closely to each other is a testament to the lackluster candidacy of each and the disinterest of the voting public.