I Won't Have Ron Paul to Kick Around Anymore

Well Dang. What will I write about? Who will you Paulie-Annas vote for?

Nobody? Consider that to be half a vote for Obama. I comment regularly on the previous Presidential Election in 2008. When all the Ron Paul for President signs came down on the east side of Flathead Lake, you know what replaced them? Obama for President signs.

The Washington Times - "Rep. Ron Paul of Texas said Monday he will not compete in primaries in any of the states that have not yet voted — essentially confirming Mitt Romney will win the Republican presidential nomination.

Mr. Paul said he will continue to work to win delegates in states that have already voted and where the process of delegate-selection is playing out. He said that’s a way to make his voice heard at the Republican nominating convention in Tampa, Fla., in August."

Yes, I voted for him. No I don't want him to be President. I voted for him because he couldn't win and I wanted to register with the Republican Party that I have largely Libertarian leanings. When I voted, absentee, I knew Ron couldn't win. Pauliacs and Paulie-Annas keep claiming that he can and then a large percentage of them say they won't vote if it's not possible to vote for "Dr. Paul." Get over yourselves. Dr. Paul is a professional candidate, not a Presidential Hopeful. It's a very good job.

Pray for the well being of the city (or country) you live in. Pray for the LORD's blessings upon your King (or President). You might also read that as vote in a similar way. Don't tear down the house so quickly. I know some of you want to. Don't.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

So I voted for Ron Paul in the Primary

Why did I do that?

That would be completely inconsistent, right? Not really, I use my vote to send messages. It's practical, in Montana, to vote in the Republican primary. Montana sends out ballots for the two leading parties in the state, for absentee voting. Montana's primary on on June 5th this year. It is way too likely that I will be traveling on that date so I asked for the absentee ballot. It's how I usually vote and even if I could vote Libertarian by absentee ballot, there aren't enough Libertarian candidates running for office in Montana for me to waste my time in their primary anyway. They're not getting elected in all likelihood and in most cases, the candidates they do forward, run generally unopposed in their own primaries.

So, I vote Republican, steering my party as much to the Libertarian side of the issues as I can. For instance former Congressman Rick Hill (one of our representatives back when we had 2) will probably be the Republican nominee for Governor, but the Tea Party (and me) both like Ken Miller. I voted for Ken. Rick will probably win and in truth he is a close second choice for me, so I won't have any trouble at all pulling the lever for him (or mailing in my paper ballot) in November.

My wife and I vote strategically and we have a lot of fun with our ballot and have our own little caucus right in our living room. It's a blast. We allocate our votes to steer toward freedom or to send a message when and outcome is a forgone conclusion. I voted Libertarian in the last Presidential Election (2008) because it was clear that McCain would win Montana's "winner take all" Presidential election for Electoral College representatives. My vote then became an expression of discontent over the way Republicans selected their candidate for President. I was not at all happy with McCain, but would have eagerly voted for him if the vote was at all close in Montana's 2008 November general election.

So I voted for Ron Paul because Ron is the only candidate that carries the Libertarian banner in the Republican Presidential Primary. Newt has quit. I liked and still liked Newt. Santorum quit. I liked Rick pretty well. I liked Cain better than both. I really wanted a much better candidate than any that were offered this cycle by the Republicans. Ron Paul offered me the opportunity to say to the Republican party that it ought to move more Right/Libertarian. It's not where I want it to be. It's not where most of my readers want it to be. I think I have three or four of you left don't I?

I won't vote for Ron Paul in the General Election because I don't think he'll be on the ballot and my views are well known as to Ron actually ascending to the Presidency. I might vote for the Libertarian if it's clear Mitt is running away with the race. It's way too early to say. I will only say that I have NEVER voted with a winning Presidential candidate. I always vote for losers. That's because when they're losing and they're the best alternative of the two leaders (always a Democrat or a Republican), they need my help. The rest of the time my vote has been cast strategically. I can safely say I've NEVER wasted my vote for President if you understand my criteria.

So Ron got my vote. I voted a whole slate of write in candidates on the ballot where the Republican was running unopposed. In some cases I voted for myself. I think the anonymity of my ballot is safely destroyed. I'm the Pharisee, and that's how I roll. With a Sadducee. That's because my vote has been used as a more benign version of the prophecy of Caiaphas throughout the years.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

The Lesser of Three Evils

I will first digress and cover an issue that after repeated readings, I now know why only one set of sins (the matter of Uriah the Hittite) is covered negatively in the assessment of David the King. I've read this passage a lot, but always failed to notice one thing. David repented prior to being punished. Now that we've covered this great difference (with Uriah, David repented after being found out), on to show this matter applies to voting, and Ron Paul.

"David's heart smote him after that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: and now, I beseech thee, O LORD, take away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly. For when David was up in the morning, the word of the LORD came unto the prophet Gad, David's seer, saying, Go and say unto David, Thus saith the LORD, I offer thee three things; choose thee one of them, that I may do it unto thee. So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days' pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me. And David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the LORD; for his mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hand of man. So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning even to the time appointed: and there died of the people from Dan even to Beersheba seventy thousand men. And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite."

I can't remember if the Facebook group's discussions are visible to the public, so I apologize if you can't see it, not being a member of the group, but one of the key quotes is this one:

"When choosing the lesser of two evils, you still are choosing evil."

Der.

I don't pretend to be an idealist, unless you take the monergist view that sin was ordained and this world we are living in is actually the ideal (big rabbit hole, not going there now). I speak more of the idealism of Joni Mitchell (love her) when she penned "Woodstock" & "We've got to get back to the garden." We can't get back to the garden, so pining for it is more than useless, it's sinful and dangerous. Joni is right that we are "caught in the Devil's bargain," but the lyrical idealism of retreating the path that got us there is a terrible folly. God blocks the path that we once took, when we take the wrong road. This is what the flaming sword is all about.

The words "only evil continually" are words used by God when referring to the thoughts of men. Also that our righteousness "is as filthy rags." It's clear in the word of God that God doesn't think so much of even our best efforts. They are laughably corrupt when measured against the motivations of a righteous God. The tedious assertion that we will make only a choice for good really condemns the chooser as self righteous. In view of the fact that we possess no righteousness other than that imparted to us by Christ, we'd do well to stop blustering in this way.

David's choice costs the lives of 70,000 men and untold women and children. This is the lesser of three evils that David picked. It doesn't even cost him more than 50 shekels personally, it costs his people. David builds an altar to God on land that he purchased from Araunah, with money he insisted Araunah take from him. This place is not insignificant, it is later memorialized by the construction of a Temple. The very place God's pestilence stopped is the site of the "merciful" end of the lesser of three evils that David chose at the offering of God. The Threshing Floor of Araunah (Ornan) the Jebusite is the Temple Mount.

Never come to me and say "I will not choose one of two evils" because you're holier than that. Choose. If you don't, I believe the condemnation of the "Lukewarm" is upon you and I would also equate you with servant of the parable, who buried his talent in the dirt, not wishing to risk losing it. In the end, even that was taken from him. Be salt instead, perfection awaits us after eternity begins, not here.

If Ron Paul is not on the ballot, and you won't vote for the best conservative alternative because he's not "good enough" then I have no time for you.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thomas Jefferson LIVES in Ron Paul? Really?

Ron Paul has a plethora of quotes on his site from Thomas Jefferson.

"Presidential Historian" and author Doug Weed says something to the effect that Thomas is reincarnated in Ron Paul. A discussion has been going on in a Facebook forum where it is asserted that when Ron Paul becomes President, our marriage issues will be essentially resolved. This relies on the same error that elects most bad Presidents, and the one that elected (in part), Barack Obama. It is that a President DOES have that much power (God save us), or that he will should have that much power. If a President is fulfilling his role as President, he shouldn't matter that much. He's important, but shouldn't matter that much. Thus when the time comes, I can vote for a Mitt Romney, or a John McCain, and do so happily. I seek to solve the nations ills on the level of Ron Paul's CURRENT office, that of Congressman. Elect another 300 Ron Paul types and fill the Senate with them too, and Barack's job is a desk job. I happily inveigh for the guy I want in the Presidency, and then go to the polling booth and try to build a more libertarian state, in the houses of Congress. My problem with Pauliacs and Paulie-Annas is that they think he will fix things as President. About the most that a President can do in a short period of time is mess things up. I contend Barack has done this, and that Ron Paul, if successful in any of his plans, would do more of the same. His solutions sound like lopping off limbs without anesthesia. The shock may well kill us. You have to go slowly so as not to capsize the ship of state. Phasing out bad programs over 5 years seems much more reasonable to me that trying to revamp them overnight. Pauliacs also forget (as he conveniently does) that Thomas Jefferson was the author of one of our Barbary wars. The first one. The Marine hymn intones "to the shores of Tripoli" for this reason. It's best to see what the founders DID with their ideas. It tells us more accurately what they really meant. A war. Halfway around the world. With Muslims. How George Bush I & II. I have concluded that Ron Paul has found out that running for President is a really good job, but he's got people believing his junk to the point that they may hand the election to the wrong guy. The really wrong guy. The Stones once said that politics was a "choice between Cancer and Polio." Few wiser things have been said. As I have said elsewhere, vote your conscience in the primaries, but vote defensively in the General Election. We can't let the wrong lizard get in (thanks Douglas Adams). Barack Obama is the Wrong Lizard. I'll vote for Romney because Romney isn't the Wrong Lizard. I'll vote as conservatively and as libertarian as I can in the Congressional elections in my state. I'll pray for the best. Why say this now? A large number of my Christian Polygynist friends insist on voting for Ron Paul, and in many cases, no one, if they can't vote for Dr. Paul. One friend went so far as to say he thinks it's all going to burn anyway, so the sooner the better. I ally more with King Hezekiah with peace and truth in his time. It's good that disaster comes tomorrow, far into the future, when we are gone. I've no desire to see the world burn in my time, or that of my children. If my children don't want it to burn for their children or in their time, they should see to it themselves, I will be gone. A vote for Ron or for no one in November is a vote for Barack Obama and destruction. I will not in a prissy way, declare that i won't vote for a man I essentially despise (Mitt Romney) to prove I don't like the choices given to me. A choice is a choice. If you don't make it, you really have made it. Be proactive. Do your best. Smile with me in November and vote for Mitt enthusiastically. Do your best to send him a congress with ideas like yours. Mitt's a capable administrator. That REALLY is the job of President. The discussion also included a Pollyanna view of how marriage laws would be made to change. Sorta a wand gets waived and it's done. No. Two things stand in the way of marriage laws being changed to be less intrusive. Marriage is a province of the State as long as there are income taxes, and statutory rape laws. In the first case, the Government wants to know your family classification so that they can assess your place in a progressive tax structure. "Progressive" is a nice way of saying "Tax the OTHER guy." Get rid of income taxes and you kick one strut out of the necessity of having legally registered marriages, which I despise more so than I do Mitt Romney. Child Rape laws raise a lot of dust in the discussion. Again, like with taxes, to make the laws work, people need to be classified. We forget easily that the Government doesn't really care if children are having sex, they only care if they have sex with adults without the proper papers. Marriage papers. There's no way out of legal registration of marriage if you allow sub 18 year old people to marry, and all states do. Ron Paul won't fix marriage. Ron Paul is a charlatan. Ron Paul is sucking away votes and we have a lot to do before marriage is in a more ideal state than it is today. Until then, vote for the least wrong lizard, and work for legalization of plural marriage. That's all I can offer. I can't offer Ron to you as a solution. He's not.

More →

Sphere: Related Content