The ‘Lesser Of Two Evils’ Con-Game

Lesser Of Two Evils?  There’s No Such Thing…

First of all, asserting that there is such a thing as a “lesser of two evils” is an act of naïvety.  It relies on a very dangerous assumption; that one can somehow quantify which candidate is going to hurt the country less.  I’ve even read essays by people who pretend they can mathematically delineate the “more evil” of the evils!  Not surprisingly, their “logic” invariably leads them to proclaim the lesser evil to be the candidate of the party they happen to belong to.  Ignorant Republicans always see the Democrat as the greater evil, while ignorant Democrats always see the Republican as the ultimate monster.

Here’s some math for you:  there are two candidates for President of the United States, one is a cannibalistic serial killer who plans to murder 20 more people with his own hands while in office.  The other is a cannibalistic serial killer who only plans to kill 19 innocents personally.  Which candidate do you support?

Unless you are a fan of murder, there is no inherent difference between these two demonic bureaucrats.  They both stand in opposition to the guiding principles of inborn conscience, as well as the protections provided by the laws of free people.  The fact that one man will do slightly less damage during his reign is irrelevant.  Is a choice between Stalin and Hitler, for instance, really a choice at all?  Which one is the “lesser evil” in this equation?

Some may argue that this comparison is a bit over the top.  I beg to differ.  Presidents have the power not only to maim and kill en mass, but they also have the power to dismantle the laws which protect our civil liberties.  To drive the point home as far as Romney and Obama are concerned, let’s watch the following video, which removes the blinders and exposes these two charlatans for what they really are; two peas in a pod:

A refusal to vote, or a vote for a third party, is not a vote for Obama, or a vote for Romney, but a vote against the charade.

There is no such thing as a “lesser evil”.  Either a candidate follows the path of truth and honor, or he does not.  If he does, he deserves our support.  If he does not, or if both candidates are criminals, then they both must be tossed to the wayside.  Just because the system has deliberately limited our choices does not mean we are required to participate in the flim-flam.

Participation Is A Duty?

I have also heard the argument that by refusing to participate within the system, and by refusing to choose a specimen from the carnival of horrors we are presented every election cycle, we are doing more harm to America than good.  This is the most prevalent falsehood of our era.

The bottom line is, Americans have been dancing in the lesser of two evils pageantry for generations and our Constitutional shield has only been further degraded and destroyed in that time.  I defy anyone to show how choosing Obama over McCain, or Bush over Gore, or Clinton over Bush Sr. has helped this country or its people.  Where are these illusory advantages and benefits of participation?  Where has our country gone while the public fettered away years trying to decide which ghoul to hand over the scepter of empire to?  Or, the ultimate question; what specifically have they achieved?  Have they gained anything?  Has any minutia of our lives been made better by following the “lesser of two evils theory”?  Only a fool would claim yes…

Brandon Smith

More…

Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to The ‘Lesser Of Two Evils’ Con-Game

1. tmedlin says:

this is the biggest load of horse-shit I have ever seen you post on this site. I’ll be back to refute this crap, point by point, so stay tuned.

2. tmedlin says:

“First of all, asserting that there is such a thing as a “lesser of two evils” is an act of naïvety.” There are a million examples one could give to show that such a delineation exists, but a thirty year old political neophyte who is mad because his candidate is not going to be president is not even going to try to be realistic, when what he really wants is to take his ball and go home, like a petulent little child.
The examples given of a cannibalistic serial killer running for president are specious, at best. There are fundamental differences between Obama and Romney and the feeble attempt shown in the video to try to equate them, completely overlooks the major difference in the healthcare debate -- that difference being Constitutional. The author and others like him completely ignore the 10th amendment when it suits them. Healthcare is a STATE issue, not a FEDERAL issue, and the CORRECT way to solve very real problems of of healthcare are at the state level. If you don’t like the way your state addresses the problem, then fight it at the state level, or move. If the SCOTUS rules against Obamacare, no one who claims to respect the constitution should have a problem with states trying what they think will work for them, or doing nothing -- it is up to each state.”
Aside from the healthcare issue there is a difference between a Marxist that believes more government/control/regulation is always the answer, vs. someone who believes that capitalism/freedom are the things that has made this country great.

• Hans says:

“I would just as soon the people who do that, go ahead and put a bullet in their own head…”

So, Tina, it appears you advocate that people should adopt suicide if they don’t want to play in the sandbox of party politics ?

If someone of good moral conscience elects to abstain from the traditional rules of the political game, they should kill themself ?

How does such a proposition align with your Christian values ?

3. Bill says:

If voting for the “lesser of two evils” is the formula we need to adopt (sic) and one in which we will “gain” better footing on which to build the freedoms we are so rapidly losing, why hasn’t it yet worked? Have we not always voted for the lesser of two evils, or to put it more pc; haven’t we voted for the candidate that said the things we liked most and both opposing candidates have said things liked by both sides, both sides claiming their candidate was best?; Ultimately each candidate being the lesser of two evils and we chose the best one. Or have we always chosen the worst one thus leaving us in the known and obvious continued decline of our freedoms, economy and status? How is it we can explain our situation otherwise? Do we have more freedoms now or less compared to the foundation of our country? Is our debt lighter now than then? Does our government, both state and federal, maintain more control over our lives while seeking more? Do we presently do anything of any consequence without first seeking “permission” from government? IF so, please advise me just what that is. “Our” representatives, at both levels and from both “sides,” author and submit thousands of pieces of legislation each year in each state. Have you checked their web sites? It is staggering! Can we say that this legislation offers less control over our lives or more? If it takes this much legislation to “run” our country, we are in deep trouble because there must be more wrong that needs legislation to correct than ever before. Why is this so? Are we so “lawless” a people that every aspect of our lives needs to come under the control of government? and the legislation they pass? Well, I digress.
The Biblical tenet we are talking of is put this way: “. . . Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?” I Cor. 5:6, Gal 5:9; and, “Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries, either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.” James 3:11-12; and, “Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.” Mat. 7:16-18. So we find either the tree beareth good fruit or evil, the fountain fresh water or salt, and a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. Consequently, there cannot be the “lesser of two evils” because this is an impossibility in the eyes of God. It is either good, or it is evil, there is no “in between” as the phrase suggests. This is why, if you’ll check the early constitutions of the states, that you had to be a professing Christian who believed in the Bible both new and old testaments to qualify for holding public office.
The whole litany of concepts brought up such as “dreams” etc. are not in jeopardy because one man is president as opposed to another. All of these have disappeared from the horizon since legislation has already passed and been put in place under several Republican and Democratic administrations, including the Reagan administration, that takes these away. It is only a matter of enforcing them when the time is right that keeps them from becoming a public debate along with the censorship of the media.
Health care is neither a state issue nor a federal issue, it is a personal issue outside the purview and jurisdiction of the government entirely. Show me where we gave this authority to government in the constitutions which we wrote establishing the parameters of their power. It is not there, so, in essence, we have bought into the idea/propaganda that one, or both of these institutions have the power to force us into contracts whether we want to or not.
If we believe Obama or Romney, or our state governments, are the answer to our dilemma, we are deluded and our faculty to reason has left us. The only answer is found in; We the People, the Declaration of Independence and our own state constitutions such as North Carolina’s under Article I Sec. 3, and, ultimately, the Bible.
If we look to government we are lost and that without repair.