web analytics
≡ Menu

Will Americans vote from fear or bravely to conserve what they love?

[The following exchange was occasioned by the weekly column published today at WND entitled “Libya: Romney’s “Todd Akin moment?”]

THE COMMENT

Alan, We love you for your strong moral stances, pro-life etc., but the amoral marxist islamist fool in the White House needs to be fired immediately. The alternatives to Romney already lost the primaries for whatever reasons, Rove probably had a lot to do with it. If you cant even win the Republican Primary, how in on earth can you hope to win the general election. Diehard purists like you are partly to blame for many losers in the primaries. Now you are trying to cut votes from Romney because he isn’t perfect. Romney is now the only way to fire Obama. Do you or do you not actually want to fire Obama? Or do you want to see our more immediate destruction by Islamists, communists, abortionists, preachers of sodomy to our kids, etc. Humans are flawed. Romney is human, and he is possible. You have some pull in religious right circles. Use it to fire Obama and his mini demons in the senate.

MY REPLY

Like many conservatives, I am no longer a GOP Republican. The manifestly manipulated outcome of the elitist faction’s sham GOP primary process in no way implicates or restricts my choice in the general election. Also, what matters is not whether you love or hate me, Obama, Romney or anyone else.  The question is, what objectively conserves what we rightly love about our country. I believe the “Platform Republican” approach I advocate offers the best hope of doing so.
As for Romney and Obama:  Obama is a lifelong socialist who openly pushed to consolidate the government’s control of key sectors of the U.S. economy, starting with the health sector.  As part of his socialist program he included provisions intended to force individuals and institutions to pay for or provide goods and services in violation of their unalienable right to liberty, and their unalienable right to make conscientious decisions, in conformity with natural right, about their own actions and associations.    He openly professed his support for so-called abortion rights and “gay” marriage; forced the acceptance of open sexuality in the military; governed by fiat, through executive orders, in open defiance of the constitutional separation of powers; and supported provisions of law that purport to give the Executive branch the power to use military force to apprehend and even execute American citizens and other persons, without due process of law.  Roused by his manifest push to establish socialism and discard the moral tenets of America’s identity, Americans loyal to the principles of the Declaration of Independence have organized politically to resist his imposition of tyranny, with notable success.

Romney professes to support all the moral goods that Obama is assaulting.  He professes to support constitutionally limited government.  He is touted as someone who would accordingly eschew liberal judicial appointments in order to appoint judges and justices respectful of constitutional government. Yet in his record as a public official the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence from his speeches and actions shows actions that were much the same as those of his opponent.   He instituted a socialist approach in the health sector, including provisions that forced individuals and institutions to pay for or provide goods and services in violation of their unalienable right to liberty, and their unalienable right to make conscientious decisions, in conformity with natural right, about their own actions and associations.  His socialist plan also included government funded abortions, excluded from Obama’s plan on account of strong resistance.  In derogation of constitutional provisions explicitly detailing the separation of governmental powers, Romney abused his executive authority to compel officials subject to his authority to perform gay marriages.  He appointed people as judges and justices a majority of whom were known for their liberal views and inclinations. Like his opponent, he avowed his support for provisions of law that purport to give the Executive branch the power to use military force to apprehend and even execute American citizens and other persons, without due process of law.  He declared it his intention to maintain the policy of accepting open homosexuality in the military.

Looking at these two candidates, one voter says: “I hate Obama.  He’s anti-American and I will vote for anyone in order to get him out.”  Another says “I reject socialism.  It’s anti-American and I will not vote for anyone who will bring it in.”  Both these voters profess to act in defense of America’s identity.  The first votes from personal hatred, with an explanation that is at best suspiciously ad hominem.  The second votes with a conviction of principle, with an explanation based on rational consideration of available evidence.  The first accuses the second of being a “diehard purist”.  The second refrains from accusing the first of diehard personal bigotry, and from any other ad hominem remark. He simply relies  on reason and factual proof to justify his stand.

If enough voters act like the first, they may remove from office one individual they consider personally offensive to America, replacing him with another whose record suggests that he is objectively similar to the one they have removed. But they will also set the precedent of being stampeded by fear and hatred into casting a vote that doesn’t represent them.  If enough voters act like the second they may permanently thwart an ideology that, whether it is openly or stealthily imposed, has consistently proven fatal to right and liberty.  And they will set the precedent of exercising rational, independent judgment, based on factual evidence as, from principled love of country, they cast a vote that represents them.

Which body of voters best conserves America’s identity, and the exceptional hope for mankind it is supposed to represent?
(BTW, I think it fair to point out that the use of ad hominem attacks and fear to bully people into voting for Romney’s socialism is a foretaste of the tactics that will be used to silence opposition as he implements socialism.  Using these tactics, he is more likely than Obama to succeed in implementing his socialist approaches. In the process his supporters will tag principled conservatives with derogatory epithets intended to demoralize them and marginalize their influence. People simply willing to accept this as a “lesser evil” are so anxious to see Obama fail that they don’t mind letting socialism succeed.  But if they don’t hate Obama because of the threat from his anti-American socialism, why do they hate him?)

[ WILL YOU SAY NO TO OBAMA? WILL YOU SAY NO TO ROMNEY? WILL YOU SAY NO TO SOCIALISM, WHATEVER PARTY LABEL IT WEARS? WILL YOU JOIN IN GIVING AN UNMISTAKABLE, VISIBLE POLITICAL MANDATE TO THE GOP’S “PLATFORM REPUBLICANS”? IF YOU WILL CONSIDER THE “PLATFORM REPUBLICAN” VOTER STRATEGY FOR THE 2012 ELECTION, JUST SEND ME AN EMAIL AT [email protected] PUT “YES I WILL” IN THE SUBJECT LINE. NO FURTHER MESSAGE IS NEEDED. OF COURSE YOUR ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS AND SUGGESTIONS WILL BE WELCOMED. AS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS APPROACH DEVELOPS, I’LL SEND EMAIL UPDATES TO THE REPLY ADDRESS YOU USE. ALSO, PLEASE SHARE THIS IDEA WITH OTHERS SO THEY CAN CONSIDER IT FOR THEMSELVES.]

Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Galatians 4:16)
Share
{ 32 comments }

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • keyesforpres

    You should have done that in the primaries.
    What good third candidate is there?

  • keyesforpres

    Nah, you’re just going to vote for an anarchist.

  • Zaphenath_Paneah_II

    Thank you Mr Keyes. Thank you so very much.

  • God’s Choice

    This insanity of who to vote for in the presidential and congressional election can easily be stopped. Vote for RIGHTEOUSNESS…God lays the definition of and examples out plainly in the Bible. Pray to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to know His choice and counsel, then vote for RIGHTEOUSNESS. Anything/anyone less than will not get us what we want in Washington D.C. and America will pay yet more of a drastic price! S.I.M.P.L.E.

  • Brother Keyes, will you be a write-in candidate? We must outlaw electronic voting, only paper ballots. The two “major” parties are dead, whitewashed tombs. If you come out as a write-in candidate, independent of ANY party apparatus (which can always be infiltrated and taken over) you will have my vote.

  • keyesforpres

    Romney is not the same as Obama. Obama hates this country. Romney does not.
    Obama said in an interview last year that America could absorb another terrorist attack. Sounds like he’s fine with us being attacked. Romney would not be fine with it. O will gut our military. Romney would not.
    We Christians have a moral duty to try to save this nation. It won’t happen with Obama. We have a chance with Romney.

    • LawAngel

      Romney has repeatedly demonstrated his support for evils such as child killing. He forced taxpayers to support abortion in his Massachusetts health care plan.

      I have no moral duty to vote for this man.

      • keyesforpres

        I understand that and I agree with you. I did NOT want Romney. However, if O gets back in we are going to be destroyed.

        • LawAngel

          I’m glad we agree, but murdering babies? And forcing every citizen to pay for it? How much worse can it get? How bad does a person have to be before you stand up and say “No. I cannot in good conscience vote for him, under any circumstances.”

          • keyesforpres

            Look, if Obama gets back in this country is gone. I truly believe O will try to start rounding us up.
            I hate Romney, but at least if we can take back the Senate and keep the House we can try to force congress to see things our way. It won’t happen with Obama.
            Just because you vote for someone does not mean you agree with everything they’ve done.
            We have a Christian duty to try to save our Judeo-Christian nation.
            You go ahead and not vote, or vote third party…O gets back in…go ahead an pat yourself on the back for your principles. I doubt God will see it that way.

          • LawAngel

            I have a Christian duty to do the right thing, and that does not include compromising my principles to help a pro-abortion socialist win the White House. I don’t believe God has held it against anyone for standing up for what’s right despite a lack of worldly gains in this life.

            So, my question remains, and let’s take a look at that slope you’re sliding down: How bad does a person have to be before they lose your vote, regardless of how bad their opponent is?

          • keyesforpres

            We must get Obama out or our country is gone. There isn’t a candidate out there (except Keyes) that I agree with everything they’ve done, but I am not going to sit back and not vote or vote third party. There is no good third party candidate anyway.

          • JohnOfPhiladelphia

            You’re not listening KeyesforPres. I was blocked from TRS for holding and propagating the views of Lawangel and others like him on that site. TRS mods won’t admit it. But that is why I was blocked. And thus, what Alan is describing in this article about what will happen to true conservavitism if Romney is given a mandate by conservatives is already happening. TRS is proof of it.

            If you really listened to what folks like Mr Keyes is saying I’m sure you will see why many still cannot bring themselves to vote Romney. Till then, I wish you the best brother.

          • keyesforpres

            If you got blocked from the Right Scoop it would have been because of namecalling.
            I know Romney’s record. I did not want him to be our nominee, but I am going to do everything I can to not let O get back in. We are going to be destroyed if O gets back in. At least with Romney we have a chance to save our Republic.
            Go ahead and not vote or vote third candidate and pat yourselves on the back. For me, I want to save our Repbublic.

          • JohnOfPhiladelphia

            ‘Namecalling’? Nope. I never called anyone a name save to defend myself when I was called a name. And only as a last resort, when the person who had engaged me in such an unfair manner could see it coming themselves and knew he/she deserved it. And if its namecalling you suggest I was banned for, what then shall we do to the likes of “RShill” and “Nukeman”? They, of course, are allowed to namecall all they want so long as they remain on THERIGHTSIDE (see what I did there? lol).

            You kid yourself keyesforpres; Much like everyone with your perspective on Romney also do. I enjoyed our engagements on TRS. Pity we see not eye to eye on this most crucial of issues. Pity.

            For now, I bid you adieu my old anonymous friend.

          • keyesforpres

            What specific thing did you say on TRS?
            I worked hard during the primaries. I met Bachmann and also met Santorum. Gave him my speech on illegals and two days later his grade went from a “D” to an “A_” with NumbersUSA. After that, I was able to support him. Didn’t know who to support after Bachmann dropped out until Santorum saw the light on illegals.
            I don’t know why you can’t see what will happen if Obama gets back in. We will race past the 50% of Americans not paying federal taxes and that will be the end of our Republic.
            I have to admit I was disappointed in Dr. Keyes during the primaries as he wasn’t saying much on this site. It was weeks and sometimes months before he’d send anything out. Now that it’s too late to pick a better nominee he is sending out all kinds of articles.
            I did come close to being banned from TRS myself during the primaries because I asked woodiej his opinion on Newt about something. One of the moderators was a Newt supporter and said I was trying to start a fight. Guess he was afraid a fight would break out because woodiej had gotten so nasty with me on numerous occasions regarding Newt.
            I know we need to stop abortion, but it’s not going to happen under Obama. We are hemorraging with Obama. Before we can heal the patient we have to stop the hemorraging. All the uprisings around the world are because of Obama. He will eviscerate our military if he gets back in. I don’t understand how any conservative thinks it’s ok to let Obama get back in. He hates this country and Romney does not. Romney won’t do an endrun around Congress like Obama has done.

          • LawAngel

            So, question still remains: How bad does a person have to be before they lose your vote, regardless of how bad their opponent is?

  • fcb98292

    I will not vote for either of the party cronies. I will write in my candidate. It was the way Lincoln was elected.

    I have lost faith in the American vote; not because of the electoral college, term limits, campaign finance or even Ron Paul’s lack of appeal to the masses. My faith is gone because American voters trust the media, fashion and pop culture which, by design, manipulate the vote of the nation.

    It is my opinion that America erred in giving women the right to vote. It created more problems than it solved. Women and manipulated/feminized men elected Clinton and Hussein. The problems neither start or end there, but the books have already been written about the curse of feminism on the Western world. Long ago, the Bible pronounced woe on any people with women in power. Fathers were responsible for Israeli families. America is not Israel but the Biblical example endures, and we are certainly no better than the Israel of that day.

    Why write in a candidate that has no chance of winning? I have to explain my actions to my posterity. Why did I vote on principle when almost everyone else voted on pragmatism? Because voting for the apparent lesser of the evils is still voting for evil, and I will not tell my grandchildren that their grandfather voted for an evil person.

  • johnhenryb

    Mr. Keys, you are absolutely correct in all your observations. Problem is, for this election we have no other choice. If Americans can be brought to demand a congressman who actually takes his role seriously and abides by his oath of office, we might begin a recovery. Meanwhile, our public education system has been commandeered by those whose agenda is to create an electorate capable of electing men such as have occupied the presidential office for most of the last century. How does our nation overcome that?

    • vigilannie76

      We DO have a choice -- VOTE 3RD PARTY! and stop being a coward!! If all these people who ‘say’ they don’t like Romney, but will vote for him anyway -- would just VOTE their conscience -- 3rd party would will by a landslide!! BUT WE ARE LIVING IN A TIME OF COWARDS!

      • Guest

        “The General Government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments; and these will have the same disposition towards the General Government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other, as the instrument of redress…the state governments will in all possible contingencies afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be marked under
        pretences so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men as of the people at large. The Legislatures will
        discover better means of information.

        They can discover the danger at a distance…they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different states; and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty.” --Alexander Hamilton The Federalist Papers Federalist No. 28

      • johnhenryb

        Agreed! Material comfort and materialistic philosophy have made cowards of us all. Nevertheless, reality dictates that not all Romney supporters would agree to vote third party and so the Romney vote would be split. Even more important a party named Third Party is not on the ballot. If he were, we still would not know what he stood for. We have, as usual, two men to vote for. Which do you think we can most likely live with while we attempt to fix our broken nation?

        • Vigilannie76

          You can play ‘their’ game and decide which you would like to ‘work’ with….I’m DONE playing the game after 30+ years of it….thank you…I will vote my conscience this time!

        • keyesforpres

          Precisely. We must keep the House and win the Senate and get Romney in and raise cane with Congress to overturn Obamacare and do NOT replace it with anything, but one line: We can buy health insurance across state lines. That would fall under the Commerce Clause.
          Overturn Frank Dodd, etc.

      • Sapient1

        Vigilannie76
        There is a real problem here.
        It is much too easy to say, at the last minute “I will vote for a 3rd party” because I don’t like the choices. My question is, where were you when the the candidates were being chosen? Were you doing the work?

        Now, will you abide by the will of the people? Like it or not, it is down to 1 of 2 candidates.

        it is hardly cowardice to vote against someone bent on destroying the nation, in favor of someone you have at least a chance to control.

        If a third party is the answer, then it should be formed and participate in the electoral process.

        BTW: Ron Paul is HARDLY what you think and hope he is. He uses references to the Constitution to push voluntaryism which is a form of anarchy…sheer anathema to the Founders.

        Don’t be fooled. Anyone can use the words.
        God bless
        S

        • Vigilannie76

          Seems like you’re the one with the problem. Ron Paul has NEVER voted for anything that was unconstitutional….and I have been an active member of the Republican party/Tea party for several years. I WILL NOT vote for a socialist -- even if you will.

        • LawAngel

          If we capitulate to Romney to get him into office, what on Earth makes you believe we can “control” him once he’s there? Do you really think a President Romney will listen to our pleas for principles if he’s already President and he won out support simply by “virtue” of not being Obama?

      • keyesforpres

        Third party? You mean Gary Johnson who had no clue who CAIR was or what the Holy Land Foundation trial was about? Or how about the crazy uncle who said recently he might go third party? I guess that would make him fourth party if Gary Johnson is already the third party. Third party means the Bowing Usurper gets back in. We won’t survive as a nation if the Usurper gets back in.

        • vigilannie76

          We will NOT survive another socialist either -- and if Romney’s your man -- you can give it up now too! I will blame all the braindead people for voting for Romney -- if obama gets in again -- it’ll be THEIR FAULT.

          • keyesforpres

            Name on thing Johnson has done that would make you think he’d be good?

      • keyesforpres

        There isn’t a good third party candidate. Paul does not support Israel and he supported the Ground Zero Victory mosque. His mouth would only encourage the hordes of marauding muslims.
        Gary Johnson has no idea who CAIR is or what the Holy Land Foundation trial was all about.
        Those sound like good choices to you? Besides, I do believe Paul supports abortion too.

  • LawAngel

    An excellent point, good doctor. Even if a Romney administration was demonstratably better than President Obama’s (which you eloquently illustrated, we have little reason to believe), the lesser of two evils is still evil. Why should we campagin on the flag of arbritary party if there is no difference between the two? Is winning an election worth it at the cost of all principals? What does it profit a man should he gain the whole world, but forfeit his soul?

    No. Not even in the face of armageddon. Never compromise.

Copyright Regulations

All original material on Loyal To Liberty is copyrighted and you will need to observe these regulations when you plan to distribute or use content from this blog. Copyright Regulations for Content on Loyal To Liberty You are free to share, distribute or transmit any work on this blog under the following conditions: * Attribution: You must attribute any content you use to Loyal To Liberty by including a link back to the specific content page. You must not suggest that Loyal To Liberty endorses you or your use of the content on this blog. Even with attribution, you do not have permission to republish the entire blog post on a website. Only excerpts of less than 500 words from each blog post may be published on other websites. A link back to the specific blog post must be included. * Noncommercial Usage: You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless authorized to do so by Alan Keyes. * Derivative Works:Within the limits heretofore specified, you may build upon the contents of Loyal To Liberty as long as proper attribution (see above) is made. If you want to syndicate or distribute the full blog post on your website, permission must be obtained before you do so. For permission, please email [email protected]
%d bloggers like this:
\"Google