John Quincy Adams famously wrote: “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” I have tried to faithfully use that principle in political judgment.
Third party candidates have a long history in United States politics, however, there has not been an elected third-party candidate as president since 1860. Back then the reigning parties–Democratic Party and the Whig Party–were the only parties available. With the rise of Abraham Lincoln, the Republican Party ( a third party) finally took office. Lincoln led the country through its greatest and most despicable internal war. In many ways, he set an example that would be followed by modern day Republicans. Despite–in my opinion–Lincoln’s abuse of power, his example is a strong testimony to the power and origin of a third party system in the United States. In the 21st century, third parties have become overwhelming. These days anyone can start a party. Communist, socialist and even neo-nazi parties are part of the American democratic system. Fortunately, these parties are nothing but an iota in the great political scheme.
In light of this brief history, why is my family supporting a third-party candidate? The first thing to say is that the Constitution Party is the largest growing third-party in the US. It was established to limit the Federal Government to its constitutional boundaries and to restore civil government to the principles our country was founded upon. It is a nationally recognized party.
Secondly, we are supporting Chuck Baldwin because he best represents our principles as a family. These principles are written in the US Constitution. This same constitution that has been trampled on for the last 40 years. This Republic has experienced more abuse in these last eight years than perhaps in the previous forty years combined. The presidency of George W. Bush has made the Constitution a forgotten document. The Patriot Act served as an example of how far American policies have strayed from the Constitution. It was in the process of discussing the Patriot Act that our current president uttered the famous lines: “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It’s just a g*damned piece of paper!”
The Republican Party, in my estimation, is not a completely lost cause. Once in a decade it presents a man like Dr. Ron Paul who believes so strongly in the Constitution that it makes him the oddball in a room of Republican candidates, when in reality, he is the true heir to the principles of our Founding Fathers. Despite Paul’s immense success nationally and financially, it was not enough to give him the preeminent seat at the Republican National Convention. In fact, they wouldn’t even allow him in. This in itself shows the distasteful state of the “Conservative Party.”
Make no mistake, I am under no illusion that the Constitution Party under Chuck Baldwin’s leadership has a chance to win this election. At this point in history–despite Ron Paul’s support of third parties–Chuck Baldwin or any of the major third parties in the US today (Constitution Party, Green Party or Libertarian Party) does not have the slightest chance of competing with the billions of either major American parties. But this is exactly what makes the choice of Chuck Baldwin so appealing. Let me explain. In a day where corruption, fraud, immoral behavior, lack of Constitutional understanding and radical interventionism prevail in the Republican Party, the time is ripe for Christian citizens to stand up for the only thing that makes us who we are: our Biblical principles.
If we do not begin to vote as Christian citizens, we are no better than the ignorant who vote because of race or because of the free government benefits. On the other hand, some are more principled and take the “lesser of two evils” argument to new heights. But the lesser of two evils is still evil. It is true that there is no perfect party or candidate, but imperfect is not the same as evil. Some are very fearful that an Obama presidency will make our dream of abolishing Roe v. Wade a distant possibility, but it is wise to remember that the Supreme Court judges were largely nominated by Republicans.
What began as a decent attempt to restore conservatism in Ronald Reagan has now declined to the big-government “conservatism” of our current president. If the trend continues, and if McCain is elected (a doubtful proposition), the elections of 2016 will feature a historic election with identical candidates. What some have already coined: Republicrats. For some of us who observe the political scene, this has theoretically occurred. All we need is an official ceremony, a marriage ceremony that is.
While Palin is an attractive candidate (pun intended), she is only a puppet in the hands of the neo-conservative mafia. Some may look to 2012 as a Palin administration. But we do not do evil that good may come, if good at all.
The radio stars and the Fox elite will continue to uphold their supposed commitment to conservative principles, but what they will really uphold is their hatred for the left and unswerving validation of whoever the Right selects, even if in the end he is only a better looking clone of his Democratic counterpart.
In the words of Oscar Harward: “If John McCain is a Conservative, I am an astronaut.” What am I supporting if I endorse McCain? I am supporting someone who believes in stem cell research, someone who believes that abortion is legitimate under certain situations like rape and incest (which consists of about 15,000 abortions a year), someone who continues to expand America’s wars, someone who refuses to shut down the unnecessary 700 US bases worldwide in countries that have no animosity towards the US, someone who does not even blink before allowing the government to bail out anormous corporations (even some Democrats had better sense), someone who embraces global warming as a fact, someone who was part of the McCain-Feingold legislation, which regulates the financing of political campaigns, someone who will embrace illegal immigration, someone who abandoned his first wife because she no longer fit the model profile. If he has enough character to endure five years of torture, why does he not have enough character to love his sick wife?
If some accuse my family of wasting our vote, then I shall ask: What are you gaining with yours?