The third party temptation discredits its candidates (and their ideas) [MUST READ!]

Townhall.com ^ | October 31, 2007 | Michael Medved

[neverdem]

The persistent American fascination with third parties and fringe candidates defies every lesson of history, logic, human nature and common sense. No minor party candidate has ever won the presidency or, for that matter, even come close. For the most part, these ego-driven “independent” adventures in electoral narcissism push the political process further away from their professed goals, rather than advancing their agendas or ideas.

Nevertheless, a clear majority of Americans (58%) in September, 2007, told the Gallup Poll that the two major parties “do such a poor job that a third major party is needed”, while only 39% agree with a statement that the established parties “do an adequate job of representing the American people.” A Rasmussen Survey (May, 2007) produced similar results, with 58% agreeing with the statement that “it would be good for the United States if there were a truly competitive third party,” and only 23% disagreeing. Among religious conservatives, prominent leaders talk openly of backing a kamikaze candidate if Rudy Giuliani becomes the GOP nominee, and a Rasmussen telephone survey shows a striking 27% of Republicans willing to back a “Pro Life Third Party” in the event that the former New York Mayor heads the ticket. In his illiterate and all-but-unreadable new book “Independents Day,” CNN’s fatuous fraud Lou Dobbs expresses similar eagerness to abandon the traditional two-party system. “Now I don’t know about you,” he harrumphs, “but fundamentally I don’t see much of a difference between Republicans and Democrats…The creation of a third, independent choice, one that has the concerns of American working people as its basis, is the way we must proceed.”

This unquenchable enthusiasm for new parties and marginal, ego-driven candidacies rests on a foundation of profound ignorance and unassailable historical illiteracy. Even a nodding acquaintance with the American past reveals uncomfortable...

[xzins]

I do not support Giuliani at this point in time

Because of the above, I did not see it as perfectly clear.

If you publicly state that you WILL eventually support Giuliani, then the media mind-manipulators have learned all that they need to know.

[Sudetenland]

These zealots to whom you are making your appeal are not going to see reason. They are no different in that from the denizens who infect the forums at DU, dailyKos, and the Hufflepuff Post.

They use the same language, appeal to the same emotions rather than logic, and they are, above all, elitist in their Conservatism.

They simply "know" what the truth is and no amout of logic or reasoning will alter that unshakable arrogance.

They are the self-annointed, self-righteous Guardians of all things true and if you don't agree with them, you are liable to be branded "evil" just like Rudy.

Go and visit any of the afore mentioned Leftist extremist web sites and you will find the same vitriolic personal attacks that we are now seeing here.

Conservative used to mean that a person made his decisions based on clear reasoning, the kind of reasoning you have just laid out, but today's Guaardians of the Right are guilty of using the same gut emotions that Liberals are reknown for using. We are rapidly approaching a point when there is no discernable difference between a Left-wing extremist and a Right-wing extremist, in the manner in which they reach their decisions and make their arguments.

Oh, and the prevailing argument that they are going to "instruct the Republican Party as one would a child" is nothing but self-delusion. The analogy is old but very appropriate. These people believe in cutting off their noses to spite their faces. They know they have no chance with a third party. Their only goal is to get Hillary elected in the foolish belief that it will somehow "teach the Republicans a lesson."

The African Americans have been using that strategy against Republicans for fifty years. You may have noticed how much progress they have made in persuading Republicans to move in their direction.

Michael Medved was correct in his article. One of the definitions of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. Well we have tangible results from the Conservative boycott of the 2006 election. See how well it worked? Why we have nothing but Conservatives running for office and all of the RINO's are running for cover...oh wait, that's wrong. The RINO's are now in ascendency, not in hiding.

Oh well better luck next time...if Hillary allows a next time. After all her politics is closer to Hugo Chavez's than Rudy Giuliani's. She might just make herself El Presidente for life.

[Sudetenland]

Only God can declare a person evil. You can and may easily declare their acts evil, but you presume too much to attack the person and not the message. Any Christian worth his salt should know that.

Above and beyond anything else, Christ's message was one of forgiveness and compassion, not hatred. No one can make such a judgment of a fellow human being, only their actions and words.

"Judge not, that ye be not judged." or how about this one-"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" and even more appropriate-"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.

You argue more like a knee-jerk Liberal than a rational Conservative. You sound as though you are being ruled by your emotions, rather than your reason.

[Antoninus]

Only God can declare a person evil. You can and may easily declare their acts evil, but you presume too much to attack the person and not the message. Any Christian worth his salt should know that.

Funny, some of the saints do exactly that. Ever heard of Polycarp?

"Yea, and Polycarp himself, also, when on one occasion Marcion confronted him and said 'Recognise us', replied, 'Ay, ay, I recognise the first-born of Satan.'"

Above and beyond anything else, Christ's message was one of forgiveness and compassion, not hatred. No one can make such a judgment of a fellow human being, only their actions and words.

You've got half of Christianity--the half that the libs love. The part you don't have is that which says that you MUST REPENT to be worthy of forgiveness. I forgive anyone at any time who seeks my forgiveness for evil acts against me. Recall that Christ didn't forgive those whose repentence and rejection of sin wasn't sincere. Those people he called hypocrites.

"Judge not, that ye be not judged." or how about this one-"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" and even more appropriate-"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.

LOL! And you say that I argue like a knee-jerk liberal? You've quoted the only verses from Scripture that every liberal libertine knows by heart. Look up the word "transference" in the dictionary and see what you find out about yourself.

Abortion is evil. If you support abortion, you are partaking in evil. If you die an unrepentant supporter of the killing of unborn children, you will go to Hell without passing go or collecting $200.

How's that for rational and conservative?