Posted on 10/23/2006 8:45:35 PM PDT by technomage
For months now we have heard a small, but vocal, group of supposed conservatives railing on that they are going to teach the Republicans a lesson this year and either not vote, or vote Democratic. I believe the numbers of this group are small, but large enough to move an election. I also believe these people just do not completely understand the possible ramifications of this action.
The time for a protest vote (or non-vote) was during the primaries. I was a very strong anti-incumbent voice when it came to many of the Republicans in Congress. That was the time to be vocal about incumbent Republicans. Not now.
Let's look back at history, shall we boys and girls? Let's look back and see just what the consequences were for the last high profile protest/non vote.
In 1992 Republicans decided that Bush senior had to go because he went back on his word of "Read my lips, no new taxes". To be honest, I could see why many people were upset with him. So, many Republicans decided to teach the Republican party a lesson by either not voting, voting for Clinton, or what most did: Cast a protest vote for Ross Perot.
We all know what happened. Bill Clinton was elected POTUS with only about 44% of the vote. The protest Republicans were giddy. If only there was the Internet, blogs, bulletin boards back then. I could imagine the posts:
"Yeah, we showed the RNC!!"
"Congressional Republicans will learn now they must do what we want"
"That will teach them"
Little did they know what they had done. Because of the protest/non vote of 1992 we got what may have been the worst, most immoral, most corrupt presidency in the history of the United States. Think about the unintended consequences:
Selling the Lincoln bedroom in the White House to the highest bidder.
Illegal receipt and use of FBI files.
A President that seriously divided this country through the politics of personal destruction.
A President and an administration that actively worked to demonize anyone with Christian religious views.
A President that used an oversized bible as a PROP!!
Waco, where the United States government killed dozens of it's own citizens.
Elian Gonzalez siezed at gunpoint by Janet Reno and sent back to a dictator.
Taxes were raised on everything, including social security. And even worse, the tax increase was made retro-active (which is what Nancy Pelosi has already said the Democrats would do).
The Clinton administration gave North Korea nuclear technology in exchange for a promise from a dictator. We are now paying a huge price for that blunder.
The attempt to nationalize our health care system. Fortunately this was one of their failures, thank God.
The Clinton administration pretty much eliminated all new crude oil drilling anywhere in the USA, including off shore.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg as a Supreme Court judge, an ex ACLU lawyer.
Steven G. Breyer as a Supreme Court judge.
Untold dozens of circuit court judge appointments.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell military policy.
The gutting of our military through severe budget cuts that dramatically undercut our military readiness.
The Gorelick Wall. For those who do not know their history, this is the policy formulated by Jamie Gorelick and put into effect by Bill Clinton that neutered our intelligence operations both domestically and internationally by not allowing the CIA, FBI and local law enforcement to exchange information. A direct result of this was the 9/11 attack.
The insane policy put into effect concerning CIA operatives! Do you remember? Let me refresh your memory. The CIA routinely used informants overseas to collect information. Most of these informants were not what you would consider nice people. But, they gave us valuable and needed information. What did the Clinton administration do? First, they prohibited the CIA from working with anyone with a questionable background. Now THAT was a real sharp move! But even worse, the Clinton administration changed the protocols on how CIA personel could collect covert information. Previous to their administration, CIA personel would receive okays from the field. After taking office, the Clinton administration changed that to getting the okay from the Washington bureaucracy, causing delays by days or weeks and effectively neutering our overseas intelligence operations!! This had HUGE ramifications.
The Clinton Administration gave highly sensitive top secret satellite information to the Communist Chinese through Loral.
MONICA LEWINSKY! Talk about having no respect at all for the office!
The target practice in Serbia that was called a war. The Clinton administration bombed the crap out of Serbia, ala wag the dog, merely to deflect attention from his Monica Lewinsky problem. As an excuse they used the fabricated story of ethnic cleansing of Muslims by the Serbs, which we all know was not true.
No response from the Clinton Administration for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Sure, we prosecuted a few islamofascists and threw them in jail. That really showed them!!
The Somalia fiasco which, if you do not remember, was handled like a Hollywood made for TV movie. Remember the film crews (with all their equipment and bright lights on the beaches watching the marines land?). Osama bin Laden has told us that our retreat from Somalia is what showed him that the USA was a paper tiger that could not take casualties. Thank you Bill Clinton.
No response from the Clinton Administration for the Kobar Towers terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 USA servicemen. This lack of retaliation further emboldened Osama bin Laden. Thank you Bill Clinton.
No serious response from the Clinton Administration for the bombing of the two USA Embassies in Africa, killing 258 and wounding over 5,000! Still further proof to Osama bin Laden that we were cowardly and weak. Thank you Bill Clinton!
The attack on the USS Cole, killing 17 servicemen. The response: We shot dozens of multi-million dollar cruise missiles into a factory in Sudan and a deserted terrorist camp in Afghanistan.
Speaking of Osama bin Laden, how about Clinton TURNING DOWN the offer from the Sudan to hand over Osama bin Laden? Clinton admitted this in a speech on Long Island. His excuse: He did not think he had any legal authority to hold OBL, even though OBL had already been named as possibly being complicit in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. And the Sudan offered up OBL at least TWICE!! Now think about that for a minute. Do you think that if Clinton had taken OBL that maybe 9/11 could have been avoided??
All of the above, and more, just because conservatives decided to "Teach the Republicans a lesson".
I could go on citing dozens and dozens more effects of the protest/non vote of Republicans. But, I hope you now see how the unintended consequences can be quite serious. In fact, they can mean the difference of life and death for thousands of Americans!
Now, of course, I can already hear the detractors: "Well, the Democrats may take over Congress, but Bush is still President and can veto anything".
Oh my, how naive. I will not even go into the various ways Congress can completely screw over this country, regardless of who is in the White House. But, I can tell you this: The War on Terror? Kiss the funding goodbye. The borders? What borders? And if you think we have had investigations out the wazoo so far, you really have no idea!
And what happens if a Democrat is elected President in '08?
Let me be clear: President Bush and the Congressional Republicans have really let us down in a lot of areas. Well, actually it is more the Republican Senate that has hurt us more than the House, but let us ignore that for now.
Republicans have not done what we wanted. So, what to do? During a time of War, a time where a radical religion wants to convert or kill every single non Muslim in the world, during this time put in a party that we KNOW will do exactly 180 degrees of what we want no matter the situation. Now that makes a lot of sense.
I would rather see Republicans in power that we the peeples could possibly persuade to return to conservative values rather then Democrats in power that we will NEVER persuade to take one conservative view point.
So, you cut and run Republicans, what will it be? Put a party back in power that we might be able to 'guide', or put a party in power that we will never 'guide' and suffer the unintended consequences of that decision?
And furthermore, if they do vote, how can they thwart their own fundamental conservatism and vote for a raving lunatic leftist and enable that Babylon of the Bay Broad, Nancy Pelosi assume the Speakershipess position?
The only punishing they will inflict either by staying home or by voting these national security light weight democrats into the majority will be to our young men and women fighting on the front lines defending our way of life and liberty. Cowards stay home and pout and roll over because they seek perfection, well they are not going to find perfection in the democrat party which in many ways is much like Foley everyday along with erasable stain of insidious stalinism.
BTW, this article that you posted is absolutely awesome. Thanks for posting.
Thank you harpo11
I can't imagine pulling the lever for an avowed Democrat.
These cut and run types most assuredly have a screw loose.
To repeat what I've said before...the worst Republican is still better than the best Democrat (Zell Miller and Ben Nelson excepted).
"Those who won't learn from history, are bound to repeat it" or something like that. It's past time that conservatives learn from their protest Perot votes and face where that got all of us; 8 years of Clinton and a launchpad for HILLARY for 2008.
It's time for a reality check for everyone.
This election will have a low turnout, so whoever turns out in larger numbers, wins.
One IMPORTANT aspect gets ignored: the main reason that the Republicans weren't able to enact a more conservative agenda was because of vicious constant obstruction by the Dems. We need more Republicans, not more Democrats, if we want more conservative agenda implemented. Those who don't actively vote Republican are rewarding the Dems for their obstruction of the Republican agenda.
Why does the author think the results are unintended?
You said it.......
It disgusts me to think that conservatives will truly refrain from voting? What purpose will that serve? Just the dems.......
Stupid is as stupid does.
"Why does the author think the results are unintended?"
====
This is an excellent point. Some people who use the conservative label to divide us, may well actually want the Dems to win. Part of the Dem strategy is indeed to suppress the conservative vote.
An article I found illustrates this perfectly.
"The premise follows a scheme previously found most often on talk radio programs: a liberal activist calls a conservative radio host, such as Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham, and delivers the line: “I’ve been voting Republican for 30 years, but I’ve finally had it and I’m not voting this year.” Or my favorite: “I’m a Reagan Republican, but I’m fed up and voting for John Kerry.” (Because that is what Reagan Republicans would do, vote for John Kerry.) At this point, the host usually asks a couple of questions and it becomes painfully obvious that the supposed Reagan Republican has probably never voted for anyone left of Michael Dukakis.
The intentions are clear: the caller hopes to make it appear as though there is already a large uprising of conservatives who are rebelling against GOP candidates, and thus, wishes to incite other Republicans to pick up the same attitude and pass it along, leading to the Democrat becoming more competitive. The successes of such a strategy on voting habits are unclear, especially given that the conservative radio host often refutes the caller’s talking points.
But the pretend-conservative act is being carried onto a whole new playing field, one that has become wildly influential over the past few years and one that does not stand to be instantly recognized as a fake. That playing field is the blogosphere, which is then used in conjunction with massive e-mailings to “spread the word” (as one e-mailer insisted I do to my readers/e-mail list) to other conservatives.
The concept is the same: the blog or e-mail claims, first, that the said writer has been a conservative for years and that they have “had it with Republicans.” They then point to an issue that conservatives would likely be upset about such as excessive spending, immigration, or the expansion of government. Their supposed rage over the issue has convinced them to either not show up to vote in 2006, or, in order to really show Republicans, vote for the Democrat instead. "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1613957/posts?page=87#87
=====
But the REAL conservatives, who may be miffed about one thing or another need to come down to reality and recognize what's at stake and vote GOP.
I don't hand out compliments willy-nilly.
You presented facts, logic and put it together into a persuasive essay. The best I've seen.
Another article, recommended reading to those reading this thread, which looks at the future of what happens if the Dems win:
Bleak House. Republicans deserve to lose, but what happens if Democrats win?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1724752/posts
I think many cut and run republicans have forgotten their anger against the republican party but have been accused of being DUers for not agreeing 100% with the GOP and now some of them are blinded from common sense and now hope for a republican defeat to "teach the accusers a lesson". While this is idiotic and childish, we should all be careful not to alienate sectors of the republican base by name calling.
I should also add that my reply in this thread is not referring to anything I saw in this thread but things I have seen in some conservative discussions on the internet. We must excite the base, not make them angry at us.
FairOpinion, I really appreciate that.
I agree. Also, looking back at the post I threw together, I can see where I could have used other terminology then cut and run.
But, too late for changes. I only hope that those who do not agree with the post:
1. Take a really close look at what could happen if Dims take control and
2. Understand the spirit in which the post was written.
I do not think any true conservative would.
I am more concerned about those who are not going to vote Republican, period, just to teach them a lesson.
I would say that approach is also brain dead.
cut and run is a great term for them
As I said, my comments about angering the base with insults was not from anything I saw in this thread. It's something I've been concerned about for a couple of weeks now from other things I've seen.
Great article you posted
That is a great post for you list the issues that we must all consider in an objective manner. I wish there were more like that its fine to get people to understand without the vitriol and hateful comments. Thanks DN
I'm not entirely sure myself; maybe it was a zen thing.
Actually, who I had in mind when I wrote it was a self-described conservative who was disappointed that an ideal world didn't manifest itself after the last election and who says "Might as well stay home (or vote for the Demos)because it can't get any worse than this."
Believe it or not, I know some people who think like this.
(Fasting and meditation are unneccessary. I do, however, recommend a dozen fresh oysters on the half shell with liberal doses of lemon slices and tabasco, washed down with icy cold Stolichnaya vodka.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.