“If you have courage and convictions, your new soulmate will be Steve Deace. He delivers.” —Mike Huckabee

Radio shows

Common Sense: Voting Lesser of Two Evils? Obama Appreciates Your Support

By Bob Eschliman

It was one of the highlights of the Republican presidential nominating process. Mitt Romney’s chief opponent, Rick Santorum, went off on “Etcha-Sketch Romney,” billing him “the worst Republican to put up against Obama.

That Santorum took the financially and politically expedient course and later endorsed Romney doesn’t make what he had to say any less true.

And before you go off on the whole, “a vote for someone other than Romney is a vote for Obama,” or “Romney is far better than Obama, that’s why I’m voting for him,” just save your breath. As Tryon Edwards famously said, “Between two evils, choose neither; between two goods, choose both.”

But, if you’re going to vote the lesser of two evils, I’m sure Obama will appreciate your support.

Yes, you read that right. Obama is the lesser of two evils, if you’re going to look at this presidential election that way. Don’t believe me? I can certainly understand that, so I ask for just a small indulgence of your time to review the facts of Romney’s political career.

We’re going to start off with the low-hanging fruit first.

Healthcare

This one is easy… Romney is the architect of ObamaCare, and while he might like to tell folks it was the “right thing” for Massachusetts while simultaneously wrong for America, his staff members urged Washington to consider Commonwealth Care as a model solution for the U.S. healthcare system. And on the campaign trail, he likes to talk about how it didn’t affect “92 percent of residents of Massachusetts,” the facts seem to tell a different story: look here, here, and here for details.

This will be a primary area of weakness Obama WILL exploit in the General Election race. So, if you think Romney is going to do away with it… you would be very wrong.

Taxation

Another easy one… while Obama has flirted with jacking up tax rates, particularly on the stereotypical liberal/socialist whipping boys: the rich and corporations, Romney has actually done it. Billing them as “closing loopholes,” he raised taxes by $309 million, mostly on job-creating corporations, in his four years in office. In fact, it would have been even more if the liberal Democrat-led Legislature hadn’t cut his tax hike proposal in half in his final year. This from a guy who bills himself as a pro-business, free-market kind of Republican.

This will likely be another area of weakness Obama will exploit in the General Election race. So, if you expect Romney to be the great tax cutter, if elected, well… you would be very wrong (again).

Life

There is no single issue of greater concern to conservatives and Christians as the issue of life. Without it, there are no other rights, and all other political debate becomes moot. So, you would assume there would be a distinct difference in the two candidates on this issue.

If you were to make that judgment solely on the basis of the candidates’ rhetoric, you would be right. However, I can tell people I look like Mr. Universe until I’m bluer in the face than Papa Smurf, but that doesn’t necessarily make it true.

Actions speak louder than words.

Barack Obama is, arguably, the most pro-abortion President in our history. And, while federal funding for abortion is still outlawed by Congress, he has made it abundantly clear he would like to see that obstacle removed, so that young mothers don’t have to be “punished for their mistakes.”

So, where does Romney stand? Just a tad to the left, believe it or not.

His “ObamaCare only better,” Commonwealth Care, provides for taxpayer subsidized abortion, even in elective cases; copays are only $50. He placed members of the Planned Parenthood Board of Directors on the board the oversees the healthcare program, thereby guaranteeing it would remain a taxpayer subsidized “right.”

Commonwealth Care was instituted in 2006, roughly two years AFTER is supposed “pro-life conversion.” He praised the legislation, and went on to appoint the Planned Parenthood board members to the oversight committee, until it was politically expedient to deny he had anything to do with it.

OK, so that was more than six years ago, right? Ancient history in the world of politics, right?

So, let’s look at what he’s done for us lately, shall we? How about the $50,000-a-plate fundraiser held for his benefit in May at the Florida home of Phil Frost? For those of you who don’t know, that’s the CEO of Teva Pharmaceuticals, which happens to be the maker of the Plan-B “morning after pill.”

Family Values

Recently, President Obama was forced to admit what just about everyone already knew about him from the get-go: he’s all in favor of gay marriage. And, like the life issue, one would assume that putting an “R” behind Romney’s name means he’s on the other side of the political spectrum.

And, again, you would be very wrong. Once again, his record proves he’s to the left of the current President on the issue.

In 2004, the Massachusetts Supreme Court created a bit of a constitutional crisis by insisting the Legislature go back to the books and create a law that would allow gay marriage, noting that it did not have the power or authority to “make law.” The Legislature refused to take up the issue.

So, Romney took it upon himself to: 1) violate the Constitution of Massachusetts, thereby violating his Oath of Office, and 2) usher in a new “civil rights movement” by ordering gay marriage into effect. He directed new marriage licenses be created to eliminate words like “husband” and “wife,” replacing them with “Party A” and “Party B.” Then he abused his power as the state’s chief magistrate to coerce officials who didn’t comply with the “new law” he created.

Of course, he says the Supreme Court made him do it. But, the Supreme Court had already acknowledged it lacked the authority to do so. And, there was a strong precedent for a Chief Executive to tell a Supreme Court go take a flying leap.

It’s called the Dred Scott case, and Abraham Lincoln’s refusal to enforce it.

But, I’m sure you would point out that the gay marriage situation in Massachusetts is “stale news.” Perhaps Romney has seen the error of his ways, even though he has made no indication to that effect, so let’s look again at more recent “history.” So, let’s look at the folks he hangs out with, shall we?

Perhaps one of the most important people working on behalf of Romney’s campaign is uber-bundler Paul Singer. He’s a Big Money guy, right? Well, that may be true, but did you also know Paul Singer is one of the biggest fundraisers for the gay rights movement?

According to Fortune Magazine: “Since 2001, Singer has quietly given $8.6 million to nonprofits to support gay rights. He spent another $1 million bankrolling the successful effort to pass New York’s same-sex marriage law last year. One of his sons, Andrew, is a Massachusetts doctor who is gay and was married in that state.”

So, I guess supporting the guy who ushered in his son’s “right” to marry another man was kind of a no-brainer.

Education

With all the other ills facing our nation the past four years, it’s probably been all too easy to forget that education reform has been another area of significant attention in the Obama Administration. But, it should be noted “reform” in Socialist-Marxist speak actually means “more government control.”

Given the GOP base’s nearly universal disdain for programs such as No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, it would be easy to assume the presumptive Republican Party nominee probably shares that disdain. Sorry to sound like a broken record, but you would again be wrong.

Despite his rhetoric of “smaller classes are a non-reform reform,” Romney’s actual record on education is one of expanding bureaucracy a la NCLB. As Governor of Massachusetts, he created a new government department called the Early Education and Care Department. Its mission: provide government-managed preschool and childcare to youngsters.

So, who do you suppose he picked to help lead the new bureaucracy? None other than Linda Mason, co-founder of Bright Horizons Family Solutions, a preschool and childcare company that later was accused of child abuse (oh, and it was bankrolled by Bain Capital portfolio, too). But that’s not the important thing to remember about Bright Horizons.

Remember how Romney likes to talk about the importance of “traditional families” because, as he put it, “every child needs a Mom and Dad”? Well, not so much at Bright Horizons, which is proud of its 100-percent rating from the Human Rights Campaign (just like Bain Capital).

To earn a 100-percent rating from HRC, you must operate your business as a homosexual and transgender indoctrination center. That’s particularly terrifying when the business in question is supposed to be helping craft the minds of young children — so doing with storybooks like “Daddy’s Roommate,” “Heather Has Two Mommies,” and “My Princess Boy.”

Additionally, staff members who believe strongly in the importance of traditional families must be silenced. It’s another vital component of the HRC 100-percent rating.

Somehow, I think “school choice” probably means a lot more than vouchers and charter schools.

Job Creation

For those of you who believe government not only has the capacity, but the responsibility, to create jobs, don’t expect a Romney Administration to fare any better than the current Obama Administration. In fact, it could be worse.

New jobs added” is truly the only apples-to-apples comparison you can make in the area of “job creation.” It doesn’t factor in “jobs lost” over the same period, but it also doesn’t factor in “jobs saved,” either. So, let’s look at it from that perspective.

During Romney’s four years as Governor of Massachusetts, there were 61,000 new jobs added, or roughly .009 new jobs per capita. In Obama’s first three years in Washington, there have been 4.1 million new jobs added, or roughly .013 new jobs per capita — almost half again as many in only three-fourths the time.

And, let’s face it, the economy is shedding jobs faster than Obama is “creating” them. Can we really afford something worse than that, from a guy who taxes the you-know-what out of real job creators?

Still not convinced? A hardcore Romney fan? Here are a few questions you might try answering: 1) Why is the Romney energy policy almost identical to Obama’s? 2) Why is Romney being supported by the Global Warming alarmist crowd? 3) Why does Romney support McAmnesty? 4) Why can’t we trust Romney to appoint strict constructionist judges to the federal and Supreme Court benches? 5) Why was the Massachusetts Republican Party in such bad shape after his four years in office?

No answer? Or, do you not like the answers you’re finding?

Either way, there you have it. Point by point, issue by issue, Romney is politically left of our current Commander-in-Chief. So, if your argument for voting for him is that he’s the lesser of two evils, well… play that record again, Sam.

If you’re reading this, thank a teacher. If you’re reading it in English, thank a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine.

Eschliman is an Iowa journalist with nearly 14 years’ experience covering government and politics.

  • Kristi

    Excellent article Bob!!  I appreciate you taking the time to take this point by point and illustrating both of their respective positions.  keep up the good work

  • Kevin Subra

    I’m not sure I can agree. If Romney was all by himself (no Congress, no other influencing factors), then OK. But there’s more than just one man’s actions (unless you are Obama, who ignores law altogether).

    • Bob Eschliman

      Kevin… Romney ignored his state’s Constitution (and the law), thereby violating his Oath of Office. So, how is that any different? And, what should we expect if there is no Republican Congress to get in his way? Well, if his four years in Massachusetts are any indication, there will be a point in time where he goes even farther left than Democrats are prepared to accept.

    • http://www.facebook.com/megan.stuhr.1 Megan Stuhr

      You are correct that it’s not just Romney but one could make a case that the people Romney appointed in Massachusetts were just as bad if not worse than those of Obama.

    • http://www.facebook.com/gordan.runyan Gordan Runyan

      The Republicans in congress understand that Obama is their enemy, and so they fight him, however ineptly, or tepidly.

      How enthusiastic will their resistance be to unconstitutional liberalism when it is proposed by a guy wearing their team’s jersey? History shows (as in the Bush years) the answer is “not at all.”

    • Paula Coyle

      Romney ignores the law too. Check his unlawful orders to perform gay marriages in Massachusetts, and to refuse to defend parents who keep their kids out of school under the parents-right-to-know law regarding sexual education/homosexual agenda propaganda being taught in schools.

  • levotb

    An excellent piece except for one, gaping whole, one major issue that Eschliman left out, perhaps because he (Eschliman) doesn’t consider it to be as important as “life” or “education”–Law and Order/Illegal Immigration. While Eschliman states “There is no single issue of greater concern to conservatives and Christians as the issue of life.”, he is absolutely wrong. The “life” issue is not one that has decided Presidential elections. If it were, Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo and other pro-life Conservative candidates since Reagan would have been President! Usually, it’s the “Jobs” issue that gets Presidents elected. But there is no more politically powerful issue than law and order of which illegal immigration and Amnesty are a part. Today, we have flash mobs (mob violence against whites by blacks) that seem to attack when and where they want to and get away with their crimes. The Invasion of the U.S. by Mexican nationals and OTMs continues mostly along the Arizona-Mexico Border and there are (as opposed to the Pew/CENSUS reports) between 40 and 60 million illegal aliens in our country including at least 800,000 illegal alien gangbangers, some of the most ruthless animals on the planet. Beheadings have already occured by Cartel operatives here. City Sanctuary City policies that violate Federal law have given havens to million of Federal criminals known as illegal aliens. They take our jobs, drive down wages, drive illegally on our roads and highways and commit a high number of crimes while here compared to legal aliens. 70% of Americans oppose Amnesty for illegal aliens. Law and order is I believe THE most important issue to Conservatives next to the economy. We’ve already seen the country heading towards anarchy (flash mobs, illegal aliens roaming the nation at will). Without it, without law and order, the country will implode.

    • Bob Eschliman

      Please refer to Question 3 near the end of the piece. The issue was covered.

    • Jay Kirkwood

       Actually I believe it will be much easier for Romney to “go to China” over immigration than it will be for Obama to get through what he wants done on immigration.

    • Paula Coyle

      “Eschliman states “There is no single issue of greater concern to conservatives and Christians as the issue of life.”, he is absolutely wrong. The “life” issue is not one that has decided Presidential elections.”

      That’s not what he said. Obviously the issue of life has not decided presidential elections, that’s the entire point of the article. For Christians it SHOULD determine their voting, but it doesn’t, otherwise we wouldn’t hear Christians parroting the “lesser of two evils” mantra.

  • Trueblueam

    This situation of having no good candidate is preposterous!!  I’m going to write in my choice for president.  I know he won’t win, but I will not have voted for the Dem. or the Rep.  Both parties are corrupt beyond belief and we are sunk.  I’m putting my trust in Christ…I see no other hope.

    • Danny

      Thankfully, Christ is not on the ballot and neither do we live under a Theocracy… or was it Theocrazy? Uhmmmm…

  • surfcitysocal

    Home run! The question I tweeted along with this article and the link was: Are Romney supporters really interested in the truth? I don’t think they are. Thank you for pointing out with cold, hard facts why Romney and the establishment Republicans who pushed his candidacy are a bunch of fakes, frauds, and hacks. I’m writing in Michele Bachmann here in California because Obama will easily win the state anyway, but even if he doesn’t, I still won’t vote for Romney. I’ll take my chances on another four years of Obama with a Republican senate (and I’m putting my money where my mouth is with donations) that will render him inert over Romney in the White House with a Democrat Senate. The senate is what’s important and if we lose that, we’re sunk, no matter who wins the presidency.   

  • Patchestoot

    Bob and Steve, you guys have convinced me. I will vote for Obama rather than Romney. We are much better off having an avowed Muslim in the White House. Mother will definitly be better off if we get rid of the child who constantly lies to her and place the child who enjoys stabbing her in the room with her for four more years, this time with out the restraints inposed by having to run for re-election.

    • Bob Eschliman

      The point of the piece is to show the folly of the “Lesser of two evils” argument for holding your nose and voting for Romney. We’re not actually advocating voting for Obama… and I’m pretty sure the rest of this website’s content will prove that point.

    • Jay Kirkwood

      Obama isn’t an avowed Muslim.  BUT Romney is an avowed MORMON!  Hey it was you who brought religion into it!  What will it do to the Mormon religion to have one of their own to become PRESIDENT.

      It WILL LEGITIMIZE THEM!  To become the leader of the country that their prophet was born in, it will legitimize them like no other act could do.  This will be their “coming out party”!

      How many souls will be lost due to this one act?  Even if you are right about “Romney saving America” and “Obama Destroying America” can you ever justify an act that would result in the destruction of so many souls? Do you put your country BEFORE GOD?

      A vote for Romney is a vote to legitimize Mormonism. It can’t be anything but.  And since Romney believes that God speaks out of the mouth of Thomas S. Monson a vote for Romney is REALLY a vote for Monson. Who the heck is Monson? Exactly, most of us don’t even know the name, but he will be the one who will lead us all if Romney is elected.

      Like I said – you were the one who brought up religion!

      • Jay Kirkwood

         Here’s an article at the bottom of this post

        Romney breaks the Stained glass Ceiling. 

        You know Romney will be our first officially non Christian President.

        Yeah, you can have your thoughts about the true religious commitments of our former Presidents and especially our current ones but all of them had to at least pretend to give the Christian Religion lip service and act like they were a member.

        But Romney will be the first who OFFICIALLY wasn’t a Christian. What kind of precedent will that set!

        http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-mormons-20120621,0,2395009.story

      • Sarah

         Obama isn’t Muslim although he might sympathize with them.  Obama isn’t Christian (but I understand what you mean about him at least being Christian “on paper”).  You can’t call what Rev Wright teaches Christianity.

        Obama isn’t committed to any religion except Obamism.  He sees himself as God.

        But then again, so does Romney.  Well he sees himself as A god at least. And when he dies he is going to get his own planet to rule over.

        Romney wasn’t only a member of the Mormon church. HE WAS A BISHOP in the Mormon church.

        That would be like if Obama was like co-Reverend with Wright.

        Patchestoot brought up religion, okay, how will this effect the Mormon religion?

        It will bring more people into the Mormon religion to be taught soul crushing heresy.
        Jay is right. When you put it that way you are telling people to choose God or the Republican Party. No you are telling people to choose God or America. 

        Well there’s only a few things I would choose over my Country but I would have to say yeah, God would be on the top of the list.

        So, yeah I bet Patchestoot wished he didn’t bring up religion, because that alone means I can’t vote for Romney regardless of the cost to my country.

        • Jay Kirkwood

           I believe the main point is that Romney is so bad that you don’t even have to do go to his religion. But if you want to bring religion into it…

          • Sarah

             I know what you mean. We don’t even need to go to his religion to justify not voting for him. But by the same token I am not going to shy away from going to his religion.

            I don’t believe Obama is a Muslim.  Sure he was taught it at school and he might culturally be sympathetic to it but in his heart of hearts I see him as either an atheist or an agnostic.

            But say he is.

            Okay, then Obama beliefs Jesus was a great Prophet, but not the Son of God.

            Romney sees Jesus as a Space Alien.

            Huh, who should I give the point to there? Are we giving partial points?

            The truth is that Obama has never said he was Muslim. And while you think he might be, history isn’t going to show him as the first Muslim US President.

            BUT Romney has said he is a Mormon.  And the Mormons have been waiting for 169 years that to happen! An actual Mormon President of the United States.

            This is part of Mormon Theology.  Two Mormons, Edwin Rushton and Theodore Turley, who said they
            personally heard Joseph Smith give a prediction at Smith’s home on or
            about May 6, 1843 that  there will be a Mormon President one day. Whether they actually did or not isn’t as important as people thinking they did and Mormons have believed in this so called White Horse Prophesy for quite some time.

            So, fulfillment of this “prophesy” will be seen as further proof that Joseph Smith was indeed the prophet he claimed to be.  This will be used in Mormon evangelizing. People will be deceived because of Romney’s election to give themselves to the Mormon religion instead of finding true salvation in Christ.

            Any damage Obama might have done spiritually because you think Muslims might look upon him as one of their own and as a result used it to support their religion, well that has already been done.  And still Mohammed wasn’t born in America.  This is Joseph Smith’s own homeland acknowledging him, or at least this is how people will perceive it.

            SO, even on a spiritual level Romney is the GREATER, the FAR GREATER of two evils. 

            Yeah, I bet Patchestoot wished he didn’t bring up religion. He is asking me to choose between my country and God.Well, I choose GOD!(Really he is just asking me to choose between the Republican Party and God because Romney isn’t going to save America).

          • Jay Kirkwood

             Bob Eschliman’s post was all about how Romney WILL NOT SAVE AMERICA.But Patcheshoot brought up a larger question.  Even if Romney would save America could Christians vote for him knowing the spiritual harm that will be caused by his election through the Mormon Church?I believe the answer is no!I know Steve and perhaps not even Bob would go that far, but perhaps they just don’t understand what Romney’s election will mean in regards to Mormon Church theology. To the Mormons it is a great confirmation of their faith that they will use to bring people into their heresy, into yeah, I will say it  into their THEIR CULT!Romney’s election will destroy souls in a way that not even electing any other non Christian (of some other non Christian faith) would because of the the White Horse Prophesy and because having someone of the so called Prophet Joseph Smith’s cult becoming President of the Prophet’s land of birth will be seen as validation of the faith

      • notbuyingthecrap

         Since you mentioned religion…what was it  you said, “one of their own?” Harry Reid is also Mormon, I don’t hear anyone attacking him for it. Ah but he could never become president…what is he…4th in line?

        Joe Biden is 2nd in line…that ought to be some motivation to vote for Romney.

    • Sarah M.

       Okay, the child who enjoys stabbing her?  What would her reaction be? Obviously she wouldn’t allow him to keep stabbing her. She will fight back. Try to restrain him some way.

      But the other child. The lying child. The child who would say “I love you Mommy” as he poisons her tea. What would her response be?  It would be to DRINK THE TEA.

      Neither are good options, but yeah, she is much better off with the stabbing child than the poisoning child!

    • Paula Coyle

      If you think Obama is an avowed Muslim, then you must think Romney is an avowed Pro Choicer, pro gay agenda, pro gun grabber. Not sure which is worse. So again we’re at six of one, half a dozen of the other.

  • Jennifer

    And what will we have to “look forward to” after Romney.  Well, I guess we could try to put up a conservative against him in 2016 but “do we really want to hurt the President’s re-election chances” especially considering who the Democrats will be putting up that year (who no doubt would be worse than Romney).  So 2016 yeah, some of us MIGHT go and try to run a candidate in the primary and be called kooks, and “helping the Democrats” for it but assuming that effort fails then we are going to have to “vote for the lesser of two evils again” regardless of how many times Romney had stabbed us in the back by then.

    So, after four years of Romney stabbing us in the back we have to look forward to… Four MORE YEARS of Romney stabbing us in the back, or if Romney loses even with us holding our nose yet again (as the Republicans knew we would because we always do) someone even worse than Obama taking office.

    Okay that puts us into 2020. How do you think the Conservative movement will be at that point?  I am guessing MUCH WEAKER. Either Romney has had eight years of purging the party from within  or worse than Obama has had four years of destructive policy.

    But for discussion sake, lets play it out.  Say “Worse than Obama” won in 2016. Well things are going to be looking petty good for Republicans. BUT, you will still have a lot of Romney want-a-bees out there telling us the only way we can win is follow the Romney model. After all it worked in 2012.  But perhaps in that case, perhaps we can get a conservative win, but we would have suffered for four years with “Worse than Obama” and all the Damage that causes. But perhaps 2020 will be our year

     More likely I see it as a repeat of 2012 where the Republicans put up  some “etch-a-sketch” and tell us we have to vote for that person because we don’t want “Worse than Obama” to win. And this “etch-a-sketch will be worse than Romney. So we are still in the pattern where socialism moves forward. Slow then fast and then slow again but always moving in the same direction towards socialism. Oh well, at least we can put up a conservative in 2024, no I mean 2028 because if “Worse than Romney” wins obviously “Worse than Romney” will want to run for a second term.

    Okay, let’s look at 2020 from the perspective of Romney having two terms,  I doubt it but say he did.  People were have grown tired of Romney, Republicans, all of that stuff. Think 2008.  Romney would have enough power to perhaps make his preference “the next white guy in line” but you know it really doesn’t even matter because say the most conservative Republican candidate ever is nominated by the Republicans like I said after eight years of Romney people are going to want a change and will vote for the Democratic Candidate whomever that will be. And of course that person would be “Worse than Obama”.

    So, where’s our best chance? Heck, I think our ONLY chance is 2016 with an Obama win this year. Otherwise please show me when will the conservative get elected President?  I don’t think the conservative movement has that much time left within it unless our society changes direction!

    • Kim

       You know if 2012 was really the last year like that Mayan prophesy is supposed to predict then I MIGHT vote for Romney. Heck not even then.

      But I am still of an age to THINK OF THE FUTURE. And it’s not wrong to do so. The ability to anticipate future events based on past experiences is one of the things that separates us from animals. Sure it’s not perfect but it needs to be part of any discussion.

      So for those who can’t count by fours let me help you out here.

      2012
      2016
      2020
      2024
      2028
      2032
      2036
      2040

      Show me where there’s even an OPPORTUNITY for a conservative to win the Presidency. And then tell me how long do you think the conservative movement has with more and more of its leaders dying off and the new generation being more liberal than the last.

      • Jay Kirkwood

        Well if Romney wins in 2012 and I assume the Republicans will want him to win in 2016 well that pushes things into 2020 and if we can look to recent history I am assuming that people are going to be so tired of him there is no way Republicans can win in 2020 so that pushes things out to 2024.

        The last time we had a Presidential Administration of the same party follow another administration of the same party was of course George Herbert Walker Bush after Ronald Reagan. And sorry, Romney is no Reagan.

        The more likely scenario would be Romney losing in 2016. And if you think Obama is bad and he is, he isn’t near as bad as whoever the Democrats find next!

        I like to say a vote for Romney is a vote for the Next Obama. A vote for someone Worse than Obama meaning the Democrat who is going to defeat him in 2016.  (or at the latest in 2020 when Americans will again want “change” from the Republicans).

        Just remember this!

        George Herbert Walker Bush → Bill Clinton → George Walker Bush → Barrack Obama → Mitt Romney (under Republican’s ideal scenario) → Democrat President who is worse than even Obama (Don’t know name yet but I don’t underestimate the Democrats ability to find someone even worse than Obama) → Republican worst than Romney.

        I actually think that the Liberal Republicans ENABLE the liberal Democrats.

        What if it had been the following?

        George Herbert Walker Bush → Bill Clinton → Al Gore

        I believe the Democrats would have so over reached that the reaction, the backlash would have been so great that the next person on that timeline would have been conservative.

        Heck even if I was wrong what would that have really meant. We would have gotten socialized medicine eight years earlier. You know perhaps we could have fought it better eight years ago like we did under Clinton. Or perhaps Gore’s focus on the post 9-11 stuff (because I think it is safe to say 9-11 would have happened even if Gore was President) would have gotten in way of any domestic agenda he was trying to achieve. Perhaps because of Gore’s 9-11 response either his base or the nation would have left him and he would have lost in 2004.

        • KIm

          So I guess if Romney wins we can all say  – SEE YOU IN 2024!

          As 2016- Sorry Romney is running again

          and 2020 – No Republican can win – 2008 again – change!

          If there are people here who don’t believe that the country can survive until 2016 what makes them think the country can survive until 2024?

          Yeah, it could only be until 2020 but that would mean rooting for a Romney lost in 2016. And you don’t want the Democrats to win then do you?

          So no, the Republicans who are telling us that we don’t have until 2016 left in America are saying that we do have until 2024.  Sorry, we MIGHT have until 2016 but there is no way we have until 2024!

        • Jennifer

           What you are talking about reminds me of a story.

          Take a pot of hot water and a frog. Throw the frog into the pot. What do
          you think will happen? The obvious, of course: the frog will jump out.
          Who likes hanging around in a pot of hot water?

          Now take a pot of room temperature water (not cold just comfortable), put the frog in it, and place the pot on the stove. Turn on
          the heat slowly, gradually. This time something different will occur. The frog, because of
          the incremental change in temperature, will not notice that it is
          slowly being boiled.

          No, I agree.  Liberal Republicans ENABLE the Liberal Democrats. Had there only been Liberal Democrats in our recent past we would have “jumped out of the pot” long ago.

          • Jay Kirkwood

            Had the election been called for Gore we would have been near revolution in 2004.  We would have absolutely all been awake.  The conservative movement would have been strong and active.

            Look, I believe we were much stronger in the 1990s. I know we were much stronger in the 1980s. 

            I don’t think we have much time left as a movement. Perhaps it is because I am seeing all my elders in the political movements I have been involved in over the years dying off.

            More likely it’s because I see Republicans today who back when I got involved  politics wouldn’t even be able to run as Democrats because they are so liberal.

            Is this all we are?  Are we conservatives just “behind the times”.  Are Republicans just 20 year ago Democrats and the Republicans 20 years from now will be like the Democrats are now? 

            Scary thought, huh.

  • Guest

    Things are bad, and I don’t like the man we’re supposed to call president, at all. Seriously, I would vote for an artichoke before I’d vote for Obama.

    • Dan Harrington

      And you’d be better off with Artichokes than with Romney.

      • Paula Coyle

        hear hear

  • Manny

    The original research (not properly cited) on Romney, his early childhood educ dept, and Bright Horizons at http://www.amycontrada.com/Romney_job_creation.html.

    • Bob Eschliman

      Manny… In journalism speak, “not properly cited” is like calling someone a thief. If you really must know where the Romney–Early Childhood Education Department–Bright Horizons connections got started, I found this letter to the editor in the Boston Globe, not Ms. Contrada’s blog.

      http://articles.boston.com/2012-01-24/letters/30655417_1_mitt-romney-venture-capital-investor-bright-horizons

      From there, you start asking questions about who these people are, what Bright Horizons is, etc. Eventually, you find the information contained in the links in the article. I’m pretty sure Ms. Contrada used the same methods.

  • JerryJohnsonNicene

    Obama (the Beast) or Romney (the False Prophet) it makes little difference.

  • Teacherbil

    Have any of you ever heard of Ron Paul and the Liberty Movement?  Young people are waking up to it in droves (believe me, I saw it with my own 55-year-old eyes in Berkeley, CA).  This is America.  Plenty of people still love freedom more than security.  And plenty of people are coming up through the grassroots to ensure the Constitution remains intact for many more generations to protect our unalienable rights.

  • SherryGHolland

    I hear what you are saying, but what about Obama’s socialist, marxist, communist past? Does this not concern anyone? You’d write in a candidate and allow Obama to win even though he wants to transform America by removing our personal freedoms? Our religious liberty? I agree we have a horrible choice, but to allow this man four more years is nothing but shameful. If we do this we have sealed our fate.

  • notbuyingthecrap

    I will take the time to read the links. He raises some questions that need addressing.    …but there is one thing that the author did not address. Does Romney have a sh*t load of communist friends advising and lobbying him?

    CPUSA says re-electing Obama is absolutely essential- they have not reached their goals or put their agenda in to operation.
    http://www.aim.org/aim-column/cpusa-says-re-electing-obama-is-absolutely-essential/

    • Paula Coyle

      “Does Romney have a sh*t load of communist friends advising and lobbying him?”

      Sure seems to. At least he has a lot of good old american liberals advising him, who have commie friends advising them.
      Please read up on his family friendly career at http://www.massresistance.org/romney

  • David Cole

    It seems to me that when Steve Deace had a chance to make a difference by endorsing Ron Paul, he instead threw Mr Paul under the bus.  Therefore I’m crying foul on this editorial.

  • DJF

    Vote for Virgil Goode! Don’t know who he is? He’s the Constitution Party candidate. If he’s not on the ballot in your state, write him in!

  • Henry Moore

    And how about on foreign policy? Some people would say that this is their biggest difference, but I think, like everything else, it is all rhetoric. Obama may even be a little more incompetent than Romney in these regards. But then, that doesn’t mean much because it is the troops on the ground, not the commander in chief, doing all the work. So, while Obama’s incompetence may seem like it harms us, it really hasn’t had an effect on his ability to fight the “war on terror”. Just look at Osama. And how about them drones? And the TSA? And the DHS? And NDAA? Bush would be so jealous at the list of Obama’s victories, even if those victories are tainted by Obama’s multi-culturalism and UN sycophancy. We know that Obama and Romney agree on Syria. And even though Obama is not big on Israel, we know his stance toward Iran is about the same as Romney’s. A little less unilateral, sure.

    Mitt’s new running mate, so-called fiscal conservative, and alleged budget-cutter Paul Ryan won’t even touch defense spending (which is six times that of China’s and 52% of the world’s defense spending. That means that five percent of the world’s population spends a little more money on “defense” than the other ninety-five percent!). Tom Coburn, a counterpart in the senate, and by no means a cut-and-run kind of guy isn’t afraid to make meaningful cuts to the Pentagon’s nonessential programs. Like planes they will never fly, agenda-driven social programs the likes of which are found in any federal department, and cartel behavior on the part of certain protected (ironically for conservatives, from the “ravages” of the free market) firms and industries with their no-bid contracts and ill-gotten favors and subsidies.
    And how about spending? Experience should tell us that, almost without exception, each new presidential term, regardless of party, absolutely DAWRFS the preceding one in terms of the tab they run up. We know for sure that Romney 1 will be a much bigger spender than Obama 1. Obama 2 will also be a bigger spender than Obama 1. But if you asked me who would be a bigger spender, Obama 2 or Romney 1, I wouldn’t be able to answer. Nor would you unless you were bluffing or stupid. But the good thing about Obama 2 is that once its over, its over. With Romney 1, we will more than likely have to suffer through Romney 2 as well.Its four more years of 100% big bad government or 8 more years of 99% big bad government. Followed, of course, by another Democrat president because they will blame conservatives for Romney’s mistakes, even though they were by no means a result of his conservatism, a quality which he lacks. The Democrats can just play the blame game like they did with Bush and we’ll get 12 to 16 years (two terms for Romney, during which the GOP and much of the base will go back to sleep, plus one or two for the Democrat that will exploit his mistakes) of tyranny. In the event of another Obama term, as bad as that sounds, at least its only four more years till we have another shot at an at least tolerable conservative.What is the winner of the Veepstakes record on spending? Dismal. Paul Ryan was one of Bush’s rubber stamp yes-men when the President was running up the deficit to no end. But that’s okay, it wasn’t popular to follow the Constitution and act responsibly back then. There was no Tea Party to keep these crooks in line. So lets give him a pass.And then there is monetary policy. Some say that Romney opposes stimulus and bailouts. And indeed he has said as much in front of crowds and cameras, quite recently. But any look at his record, including his support for TARP and his favorable comments on Helicopter Ben Bernanke will show you otherwise. And I have yet to hear one utterance on the Fed’s policy of lowering the interest rate (which caused the housing crash in the first place), granting favors to cronies outside of official bailouts, and printing money outside of official stimulus, namely quantitative easing.If, when reading this comment you said to yourself, “hey, this guy sounds like a Ron Paul supporter”, you would be right.

    • Paula Coyle

      You might want to change your mind re the foreign policy thing now that we have seen the Benghazi attacks and the intel surrounding how that all unfolded.

      • http://twitter.com/KeimgMeg Keimh3reg Peh2u Meg

        Its a minor incident. It speaks volumes but the foreign policy ramifications pale in comparison to a great deal many other things. I prefer to focus on why we got involved in Libya at all. That was the prime mistake, not anything to do with the embassy attack. Aside from the actual deaths, the worst part about it was that it was used by the president to condemn free speech (the anti Muslim film, that actually had very little to do with the incident), which has more to do with his shortcomings on domestic policy than on foreign policy.

  • Pingback: The Difference Between Obama And Romney; My Take On Paul Ryan « keimh3regpeh2umeg

  • Eric

    Respectfully disagree. Words could mean something. My litmus test is abortion. Obama promises it. Romney doesn’t. I’ll take Romney at his word.

    • Paula Coyle

      Feels good to be lied to, doesn’t it?

  • Laurence

    I BEG all of you to go to Constitutionparty.com. There you will find the answer to the “lesser of two evils” dilemma, and other FAQ’s. You’ll support their platform. Vote your conscience and help build the 3rd-largest party into the largest!

Deace on TV