Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

In the Name of Principle, Let’s Commit National Suicide

Ah…America.  It was a good run, no?

But alas, for some at least, the time has come to move on to other things.

You see, we didn’t end up with a Conservative GOP nominee like so many had hoped for.  We didn’t get someone along the lines of Governor Sarah Palin or Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich to represent our party and our interests.

Thus, some have decided that the destruction of our Republic is a much more tolerable course than setting aside what truly are at this juncture irrelevant animosities.  No, it’s more important to nurse those wounds and to stay bitter…to fiddle with various and sundry grievances and work ourselves into such a lather that we feel justified…

…in sitting on the sidelines during the most crucial battle of our times.

Please understand…I’m not calling anyone out here since, indeed, I’ve read similar comments elsewhere that led to this OpEd.

And regardless of the somewhat snarky tone in which the preceding was written, I hold no anger toward those who are struggling with this issue.

In truth, I too struggled.  I even outlined my struggle on this site and in fact even on the post I wrote on what happened to be my birthday, my support for the ticket was somewhat qualified.  I’ve even joked on this site and elsewhere that "Obama has to go more than Romney sucks" and for my way of thinking, that’s the truth of it.

And so, I hold no animus for those who are working out and make the kind of deliberations that I too was forced to make.

I only suggest that you have an extremely limited amount of time to get to where America needs you to be.

Everyone here knows how damaging Obama is for America and what he’d do with the chance to put two or more judges on the Supreme Court.

Or how he’d treat our military, those currently in service as well as those retired from the field.

Or how he’d handle issues regarding energy independence, intrusive federal regulations, expansion of the dependent class, race relations and the destruction of the private sector.

My only point to those with qualms about Romney, legitimate as many may be, is this…

This election is a referendum on Barack Obama and his disastrous policies.  This election is not about Mitt Romney.

Once the primary cycle ended, any discussion regarding the items in Romney’s con column or Romney’s conservatism or lack thereof was necessarily tabled.  Not because we believe the hype or because we’ve been bought off or cowed or because we no longer believe in the reform measures Governor Palin has fastidiously outlined over the last few years…

…but because WE DO.

And the first and most vitally important step that we absolutely must take on the path to reform is to remove Barack Obama from office.  Period.

Consider this.  We believe so much in relentless reform that we’re willing to vote for a less than perfect candidate in order to get there, or rather in the terminology President Obama used to refer to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, a "less than optimal" candidate.

Past is prologue as Governor Palin reminded us last night when she called us all to do our duty; and so we know how Obama would carry on should he be re-elected.  We know what he’ll do…we know what the cost will be.

And the cost is too high.

So, once we had a nominee, everything else was necessarily put to the side in order to deal with the primary issue at hand.  Not ignored or forgotten…merely set temporarily apart in the name of a strategic détente.

Pulling the lever for Mitt tomorrow doesn’t mean you abide by his record nor does it mean that you’re wildly impressed by his tactics or his rhetoric.

It means only that you recognize the wholly unique value he holds as the single means to remove Obama.  You recognize that he is the current standard bearer, imperfect though he may be, for the conservative agenda against a political adversary that despises the core principles that make America great and seems hell bent on tearing America down.

I know folks bristle at what I’m about to say and please understand, I’m not saying this to incite or anger; but it is a statement of fact.  Perhaps the anger and push back stem from perhaps a subconscious recognition of this reality:

If you do not vote for Romney tomorrow, you are operationally supporting the re-election efforts of Barack Obama.  Passively supporting Obama, but supporting him nonetheless.

For any conservatives out there who are worth their salt who are considering this course of action, that’s got to be enough to give them pause.

And so I ask, rather than lashing out in an instinctive need to react to the truth presented, please mull that thought over in your minds and understand what it means to you and to the rest of the country.

Now is not the time for summer soldiers and sunshine patriots who only fight when the battle is to their liking and is on their terms.

Now is the time for all patriots to take up our metaphorical arms and defend our beloved Republic and the principles of our founding.

You have the chance to do that tomorrow…to lob deadly, targeted ordnance at Obama’s re-election prospects.  That ordnance, your vote, will do untold damage.  If enough of us do it, we live to fight another day.  If not…well, I’ll leave you to fill in that blank as you consider what a second Obama term would mean to you and to our nation.

So what say you?  Will you stand and fight?  Will you be the Paul and Paulette Reveres of our time?

Or will you sit on the sidelines and do nothing when your Republic needs you most?

Your decision will have national and international repercussions so for the sake of this and future generations…please choose wisely.


"If the people fail to vote, a government will be developed which is not their government… The whole system of American Government rests on the ballot box. Unless citizens perform their duties there, such a system of government is doomed to failure."     President Calvin Coolidge








Tags: , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • virginiagentleman1

    So very well said, Mary Beth!  I fervantly hope that this op-ed is read by every commenter here at C4P.
    The conversation has indeed gone past our dislike of Romney as our choice, because the very SOUL and FUTURE DIRECTION of our beloved America is in the balance tomorrow.

    If I could, I would "like" this op-ed millions of times. Thanks for speaking the truth to the problem milady. VG

  • Steve_Flesher

    Eloquently stated today, Mary Beth.

    And Eloquently stated last night by Gov. Palin.

  • Chris

    I think you summed up what many of us have gone through this election cycle with the many highs and some very low lows…

    In the end, the bigger picture has to be kept in the front of our minds….if we don’t take a stand now and stop Obama and his policies, there won’t be a chance to take a stand later…

  • ? Jim ?

    A bit OT – –

    That being said, I also say: Romney is NOT going to be the savior a lot of so called conservatives think he will be. He hasn’t changed in the past 10 – 8 – 6 – 4 – 2 – 1 years.

    If ya want to know how Romney will govern ya only have to look at his record. If ya don’t the cure is easy. Simply stick your head in the sand.

    Romney is the same lying, flip-flopper we saw during the primaries. He outright lied about his opponents then but will not tell the truth about Obama now.

    Will we be better off 4 years from now with Romney opposed Obama. Absolutely! NO question.
    Will we still be sliding down the liberal slope? You Betcha we will!

    • Laddie_Blah_Blah

      I don’t think anyone here has any illusions about Romney. He will have to be watched and held to account. 

      I do not expect, for example, any reform of the crony corporatist cabal of which he and Bain were a part. Neither he nor any of his sons has ever served in the military. I have big questions about how he will handle national security, although he has robust support from military retirees. The military is supporting him mainly because he is not Obama. Obama will leave him with a resurgent Islamic fundamentalist movement. He must handle that better than Obama did.

      Then there are the SC nominees. No more David Souters. Please.

      I will support him, but watch him very carefully. Not that much of a fan, but the alternative is unthinkable.

  • devitor

    Mary Beth, spot on, but some people just can’t be reasoned with. If by this point – with Gov. Palin’s clear declarations of support, the $5,000 donation, and now the Facebook Status in which she urged people to vote for Romney/Ryan – some people still don’t get it, I don’t know what point there is in even engaging them in conversation. Best to cut them and move on.

    • IsraeliCojones

      I agree.

    • FlyoverGuy7

      I agree.

  • FlAli

    That is exactly what I say.  It is a process and it might be a good thing that Romney was the Republican nominee.  He might not be as conservative as others but it will make it easier for the Blue Dog Democrats (if there still such a thing) and many Independent to vote for him.  The important thing here is NOT to have four more years of this mess we have been living with and get the present administration out of the White House.

    Of course, others will dig in their heels and get all high and mighty and not vote for anyone or write in whatever or even vote for Rosanne Barr to prove that they are so righteous because, you know, it is more important for them to be righteous than think of the greater good.

    And yes, I still feel sorry for people like that.  All they are are selfish, little people who probably when they were children took all their toys and went home if they did not get their way. 

    So, insult me all you want, I really do not care I look at the source not the insult. 

    • wodiej

      Excellent points. As I have been listening to Romney at rallies I thought to myself, I wonder if he could be getting 20% more of the Independents than obama if he was too far to the right.  The country is actually only comprised of less than 35% very conservative people.  Another 30% or so are liberal.  The rest are Independents.  obama cannot be beaten without them.

  • carmtom13

    very well said Mary Beth. I just hope that those sitting on the sidelines wake up. Like Mark Levin has said so many times this election is not about Romney versus BHO, it is about BHO versus us, its about LIBERTY! There is a saying "Every good man and woman should come to the aid of their country." Well the country needs ALL of US NOW to VOTE Obama out. VOTE TO SAVE OUR REPUBLIC AND WE MUST NOT FORGET IN ORDER TO REPEAL OBAMACARE WE MUST WIN THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE. PLEASE VOTE!


       Why is it so easy for you all to just ignore that Romney is the nominee?

      • IsraeliCojones

        Because he’s facing the Devil’s servant.

      • Mary Beth House

        Because we don’t have a say in who the opposition nominee to Obama is but we do have a say in how we respond to that reality?

      • lanahi

        Our "perfect offering" wasn’t running this year.  We got stuck with Romney.  Like it or not, it is what it is.  "Ring the bell that can still be rung."

        Vote…because we still CAN!

      • wodiej

        Because saving the country is more important.  Millions of people have fought, bled and died for this country and the freedom we have.  There will never be a perfect candidate, Republican, or leader who fulfills every promise they make.  I am sure Romney realizes after what happened in 2010 mid terms, that conservatives want accountability, fiscal responsibility and for the gov’t to get out of the way and they are not going to stop fighting for it.  

        This is the 1st presidential election where Tea Party principles have really been front and center.  It’s still in it’s infancy but will continue to grow and become stronger.  We don’t know what Romney will do.  I hope and pray he does what he said he would.  We do know what obama will do with another 4 years and it will be worse than the first 4.  I believe the first thing we need to do as a country is get fiscal sanity back.  Jobs, grow the economy, reform our entitlement programs and roll back our federal deficit.  Romney has a great business background so in my mind, he is the right person for what is most important right now.  He does love this country, he believes in capitalism and he believes in the founding principles set forth by our Founding Fathers.  The country is paralyzed if we do not have a thriving, robust economy.

        I am an optimist most of the time and try to look at the glass half full instead of half empty.  I also put an awful lot of faith in God because sometimes that is all we have to hold onto.  How about you-want to give it a go?

  • MaMcGriz


  • John_Frank

    Agreed with this post until the following line:

    "If you do not vote for Romney tomorrow, you are operationally supporting the re-election efforts of Barack Obama.  Passively supporting Obama, but supporting him nonetheless."

    Sorry, but that statement is not only wrong but morally offensive; and negates the potential good that this post could have done.

    Listen again to what Bill Whittle said on this topic in his video titled:

    Falling On Principle:

    One can read a transcript of Mr. Whittle’s commentary at this page:

    If the commentator had followed Mr. Whittle’s lead, I would have applauded, but unfortunately she did not, and so one must strongly object.

    P.S. One can find more of Mr. Whittle’s work at

    • TeflonWarrior

      Read Sarah’s FB post and tell me that again.

      • John_Frank

        I have read the Governor’s FB post with great care.

        No where does she state that if you do not vote for Romney, you are aiding the re-election of Obama.

        Furthermore, you can not reach that conclusion from what she has written.

        Rather, she is making the case as to why, even if you are standing on principle and not wanting to vote for Romney, the better course, if you want to be true to your principles is to vote for Romney.

        Big difference between what the sentence in issue states and what the Governor wrote in her FB wall post.

        • TeflonWarrior

          Dude, you’re dancing on a snowflake. What the heck do you think that means??? Do you really think that it’s not helping Obama if you like write her name in?  Do you really believe if you and I stood in front of the governor and asked her she would tell you "It’s OK don’t worry even if you don’t vote for Mitt your not doing damage to the campagin (let alone the nation), go ahead & write in whoever."  Really?? She’s always been a pragmatist, read her & her families books. Just think what she said about Christie this week, that it was really, really unfortunate that he did his little bearhug.  Think about that.  Sounds like your trying to rationalize & that means you know what the right thing is but you don’t wanna do it. Quote from the Governor, "Take a Stand!"

    • Mary Beth House

      If it’s our duty to vote Obama out of office as Governor Palin asserts, then the obverse must also be true.

      • devitor

        It’s not offensive. It’s the truth. If you pull ballot BS you’re voting for Obama. Period. Ballot BS is defined as voting third party, frivolous write-ins, protest votes, under-voting. And you are contravening Gov. Palin who has been clear on this numerous times, Mr. Whittle’s musings on principles notwithstanding. This is not the time for that. The time is to boot Obama out of office. Gov. Palin did not run. We have our ABO nominee and she supports him in word and deed. There’s nothing else to say about it.

        • Mary Beth House

          I truly do not understand why people don’t get this.

          We have two choices.  Continue with the disastrous Obama policies or reject the disastrous Obama policies.  To reject the policies, Obama must go. 

          To get rid of Obama, Romney must be elected.

          What happens after that and how we as a part of the reform movement are entirely irrelevant right now as is how we may personally feel about Mittens.

          • John_Frank

            Because to say to someone that if they do not vote for Romney, they are therefore supporting Obama is simply a false argument..

            First, there are legitimate third party candidates. Frankly I have been very tempted to support Gary Johnson, because of his position on the Federal budget and his foreign policy views.

            However, because I believe that if Obama is re-elected, there is a very strong likelihood that we will not be able to recover from another four years under an Obama administration and because we have an opportunity, if Romney is elected President, to repeal Obamacare and therefore reverse a loss of a freedom, even though he is far from the ideal candidate and I have strong misgivings about his domestic and foreign policy agenda, I have decided that voting for Romney is the best choice in the all circumstances.

            But to suggest that it is my duty to vote for Romney, and that if I don’t therefore I am supporting Obama is not only fallacious and specious, but a denial of one of my basic freedoms, to vote for the candidate that I choose.

            • Mary Beth House

              I’m sorry but it’s not a false argument.  There are two options here.  This is a zero sum game.  You either support one or you support the other.

              If you support candidate A by default you reject candidate B.  There is no C here.  Either A or B will win.

              Since Obama is the current President, rejecting support for Romney equals a passive support for Obama, at least operationally.  You are denying Romney a vote and providing Obama a partial vote by you’re refusal to vote against him.

              I’m sorry you see it as fallacious and specious but again this is a zero sum game.  One will win. 

              And again, it doesn’t deny you your freedom to choose to do whatever you want.  My position and Governor Palin’s position per her remarks and posts is that we as conservatives have a duty to vote to remove Obama.

              You can choose to reject it but that doesn’t make it less of a duty.

              • John_Frank

                Actually no, it is not a zero sum game, although the likelihood of a third party candidate winning is between slim and none.

                Putting that aside, when you take the argument to its logical conclusion, you end up with statements like "if you are a Palin supporter but do not vote for Romney and the Republicans you are not a Palin supporter."

                That is why the absolute position of "if you do not vote for Romney, you are aiding the re-election of Obama" takes you to the wrong place.

                Everyone has the right to choose how they will vote. Even though you may perceive Obama’s re-election as an existential threat to our freedom, others do not.

                As a result, the zero sum absolutist argument is non-persuasive to those who are inclined not to vote for Romney on principle.

                Rather and to persuade those who believe that standing on principle and not voting for Romney is the appropriate course, you must persuade that individual to see that the better course is to vote for Romney and that in doing so, he or she is serving the very principles that they so strongly believe in.

                • Mary Beth House

                  No that logical conclusion is not logical.

                  A logical conclusion would be that "If you are a Palin supporter but do not vote for Romney and the Republicans, you are a Palin supporter who has rejected the strategy she has forwarded to save America."

                  I don’t know why you keep conflating the issues.  You have the right and responsibility to vote as an American citizen.  Vote for whoever you want.

                  But as a conservative who is informed, you have a responsibility to do your part to vote Obama out of office.

                  Two separate things.

                  As for the last part of your comment, this article was meant to do just that but honestly, at this late date, those who don’t get that either Obama or Romney will win and that they have the chance and the duty to fight this battle for the good of America and for our posterity, I don’t know what else to say.

                • FlyoverGuy7

                  Nobody here can deny your right to vote or dictate how you will.

                  As to Mary Beth’s point, perhaps you can think of it as follows.  You have 1 vote to allocate.  You can give it to Obama or to Romney.  If you use it in any other way, the practical effect is the same as giving 1/2 vote to Obama and 1/2 vote to Romney, i.e., canceling out your vote.  By doing so, you will have forgone the opportunity, some say duty, to help remove Obama from power.  I doubt Mary Beth was casting any moral aspersions on that choice, simply pointing out that it would go against America’s interest, Palin’s wishes, and, I would add, not be a rational response to the tragic, near-tyranny Obama has proven he’ll keep giving us. 

                  You’ve made your point amply.  I doubt people here are interested in humoring your further splitting of hairs, standing on nuances of wording, or artful subtleties of reasoning.  It’s gone past tiresome. 

                  Vote as you will. 

        • TENCOLE

           Really?!?……my one little "non-vote", in the middle of Illinois will give Obama the win?

          • devitor

            Your “little non-vote in the middle of Illinois” is going against what Sarah Palin asked us to do and going against the goal of replacing Obama. That’s right. Your non-vote is a vote for Obama, because it’s taking a vote away from Romney. I don’t for the life of me understand why we’re even having this conversation with an election less than 13 hours away from starting (EST – NYC).

          • IsraeliCojones

            Oh G-d, I just read that and I can’t believe it.

            Do you know how many Conservatives thought exactly the same thing about "their one little non-vote" in 2008 and stayed home for having the personal satisfaction of "teaching the Republicans a lesson"?

            Five freaking millions!

            Five million voices that lacked to McCain and Palin and gave victory to the most thuggish President EVAH!

            You’re not living in a desert island! Your choices have consequences even if you keep telling yourself  3 million times a day that they haven’t!

            WTH is this?

            • TENCOLE

               Not in Illinois.

            • John_Frank

              Do you know how many Conservatives thought exactly the same thing about
              "their one little non-vote" in 2008 and stayed home for having the personal satisfaction of "teaching the Republicans a lesson"?

              No, McCain killed his chance of being elected President when he came out in support of TARP.

              A lot of conservatives and libertarian leaning conservatives made the decision after the 2004 election, when it became apparent that Bush and the Republicans were not going to stop pursuing their big government agenda that it was time to walk away from the Republican party.

              As a result, in 2006, the Democrats regained control of the House and Senate.

              In 2008, Republicans had an opportunity to regain the trust of the millions of people who had walked away from the Republican party.

              While his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate met with enthusiastic applause, McCain threw away his chance of winning, when in the face of the financial collapse, he came out in support of TARP.

              We already knew that on foreign policy, McCain would largely follow the Bush "Freedom Agenda"

              With his support of TARP, he painted himself as another big spending, big government Republican who was not going to advance the cause of limited government, individual freedom and responsibility, but rather was prepared to pursue the same Statist domestic agenda as the Democrats.

              • IsraeliCojones

                With his support of TARP, he painted himself as another big spending,
                big government Republican who was not going to advance the cause of
                limited government, individual freedom and responsibility, but rather
                was prepared to pursue the same Statist domestic agenda as the

                So sure, it made sense to give a chance to a Marxist who is a Statist on steroids and has done everything he could to trample Americans’ individual liberties, to a point that everybody is left wondering if a turnaround will ever be possible.

                That must be Conservative logic, but it sure escapes me.

                • John_Frank

                  In supporting TARP as vigorously as he did, McCain painted himself as a Statist who was willing to go along with the Socialist agenda.

                  The only difference between a Republican who is willing to go along with the Socialist agenda and a Democrat who is going to pursue a Socialist agenda is the speed with which you get to the destination.

                  Republicans had put up Dole against Clinton and then put up Bush against Gore.

                  With Bush, America got 8 years of ever expanding government and never ending deficits.

                  Then along comes McCain, who agrees with Bush over TARP and agrees with Obama in pushing for cap and trade.

                  Many conservatives said, if the Republican party is going to push the socialist agenda, in reality there is no difference between the Democrats and Republicans, so what is the point?

                  As to foreign policy, since Obama took office McCain has supported the Arab Spring agenda, which flows from Bush’s Freedom Agenda and Obama’s Cairo Agenda.

                  Yes, under McCain, we would likely not have had kill lists, with drones being used to take out those coming to the aid of those who have been maimed as a result of the first drone attack; and the Benghazi debacle would not have happened, in that he would have used American military power to intervene forcefully; but he would have continued pursuing Bush’s Freedom Agenda.

                  Like Bush, McCain is a neo-conservative who is an interventionist.

                  What is the substantial difference between a Democrat who is a neo-liberal and an interventionist and a Republican who is a neo-conservative and an interventionist when it comes to dealing with the Islamists?


                  He believes that it is better to have elected Islamist governments in countries like Egypt, Syria, and Libya; governments which will pursue the fundamentalist Islamic supremacist agenda based on Sharia law, rather than being ruled by greedy dictators.

                  He furthermore believes that the Muslim Brotherhood and their fellow travelers will "moderate" their stance, once they are elected to office, despite having declared war on America.

                  So, again, from a foreign policy perspective what would have been the substantial differences between a McCain administration and what has transpired under the Obama administration?

                  Yes, the rhetoric would have been different.

                  Yes, we would not have a seen a President bowing to a Saudi King.

                  Yes, we would not have seen a President embarking on a course of action that deliberately places distance between himself and Israel.

                  Yes, we would not have seen a President sending additional troops to Afghanistan, while at the same time announcing a withdrawal date.

                  Yes, he would have pushed fairly hard to extend the Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq, although likely with the same results as achieved by Obama.

                  Yes, captured terrorist would not have been read their Miranda rights.

                  Yes, he would not have given the Cairo speech

                  … but McCain would have been supportive of and helped ferment the "Arab Spring" even though that meant a strong likelihood of Islamists coming to power in places like Egypt, Libya and Syria.

                  So, from a substantive point of view, what would have been the difference at day’s end?

                  • IsraeliCojones

                    But in fine, it wasn’t true, was it? And it was easy to spot it, because even me, a little Israeli, saw how dangerous Obama was, that from the get-go.

                    That’s what I never get with the "purity" people. Suicide in the name of principle, as says the title.

                  • John_Frank

                    This is in reply to the following comment:


                    A lot of us did (i.e. see how dangerous Obama was).

                    To be honest, I find it difficult to put myself in the mind of those who decided to stay home and not vote for McCain, because I believe the argument in favor of not voting was flawed.

                    Obama is not a liberal. He is a statist in pursuit of a socialist agenda supported by the Communist Party USA. That is all I need to know.

                    The difficulty? 

                    Republicans keep putting up candidates who are prepared to go along with the socialist agenda at home that places us on the Road To Serfdom, setting the stage for the collapse of the Republic, and want to pursue the self-defeating interventionist agenda abroad that America has been following for some time that only hastens the ultimate collapse.

                    This makes it extremely difficult at times for those of us who see the folly of this course to bring ourselves to vote Republican.

                    It is why long time Republican stalwarts like Roger Stone Jr decided, enough was enough and walked away from the Republican party during this election cycle.

                    It is why, if Romney goes along with the socialist agenda at home and pursues the self-defeating interventionist agenda abroad that America has been following for some time, unless there is a dramatic improvement in the economy, he will be a one term President, because millions of Americans will either stay home or vote third party.

                • FlyoverGuy7

                  I guess there are some folks who’d rather cling to their elaborate rationales, maintain the purity of their principles, or preserve their personal satisfaction that they’re "right", than to contribute to constructive change of epic proportion. 

                  It’s fruitless to keep trying to reason with such minds/personalities. 

                  I’m beginning to think some of them are just getting some jollies by getting a "rise" out of others by being stubbornly, endlessly argumentative.  Or maybe they just crave attention. 

          • John_Frank

            That is a false position.

            "To those who think their vote is just one vote and doesn’t matter: well,
            with respect, you are dead wrong. No single raindrop determines the
            size of a river, but whether raindrops fall or don’t fall does."


            The better position to take is that telling someone it is their duty to vote for candidate A is wrong. In claiming that it is someone’s duty to vote for a particular candidate that person is denying a fundamental freedom, the freedom to chose for whom an individual will cast his or her ballot.

            That written, the reasons that some have given for not voting for Romney, even though they firmly believe that Obama and all that he stands is absolutely wrong, based on principle, etc., is also a mistake.

            Yes, Romney is far from the ideal candidate for our side and frankly I have deep misgivings about what he will do if elected.

            However, we live in an imperfect world.

            Romney has promised to not only to stop what the socialists and communists are doing, but to put us on a path towards fiscal sanity and economic freedom, and to repeal Obamacare, thereby allowing us to regain a freedom that we have lost.

            [Side note: The Governor in her most recent FB wall post sets out cogent reasons as to why it is better to vote for Romney:


            Will he honor his promises? I don’t know, but I am prepared to give him a chance; and I am also prepared to say that if he does not, especially if he fails to cause Congress to repeal Obamacare, I am prepared to make common cause with those who will work to see that he is a one term President.

            On the other hand, we know what Obama will do if he is re-elected and has another four years in power to pursue the socialist agenda. We will be well on our way to the Road to Serfdom, and in all the circumstances, we may not be able recover.

            That is a risk that I am not prepared to take, and anyone who believes in free markets and free men will want to think carefully about these matters before deciding not to vote out of principle.

          • wodiej

            I wonder if you lived in Ohio or PA if you would still feel the same way.

      • John_Frank

        Voting is both a duty and a right.

        For the reasons stated in the Governor’s most recent FB wall post it makes eminent good sense to and it is in our best interest to vote Republican.

        However, it is not "our duty" to vote Obama out of office.

        Following that logic I could just as easily state that it is our duty to vote to re-elect Obama.

        The position is a straw man argument. As such the reverse is not true.

        • Mary Beth House

          No your argument does not ring true for the sole reason that both outcomes do not hold the same weight.

          It is our duty and right to vote.  Generically speaking to make our voices heard and to have our say as to who will represent us better and move the agenda we want.

          Separately, it is our duty and responsibility to remove Obama, because of who and what he is and the danger he poses.

          You’re conflating the two.

          • John_Frank

            Incorrect. You are stating that someone must vote a certain way out of duty, thereby denying that individual the fundamental freedom to choose whom he or she wishes to vote for.

            The duty stance is just as false as those who argue in opposing Obama and his policies you are a racist. Both positions result in a denial of a fundamental freedom, the freedom to choose whom an individual wishes to vote for.

            • Mary Beth House

               They can choose to do their duty or they can choose to reject that duty.

              They have the freedom to choose one way or another but it doesn’t mitigate the fact that we have a responsibility to fight for the future of our Republic and remove an existential threat to freedom.

              • John_Frank

                 … but that does not mean that those who decide to not vote for Romney, either by voting for Johnson, or not voting at all are aiding and abetting Obama’s re-election. That too is a bridge too far.

                • Mary Beth House

                  If they are not voting for the one person who can remove Obama, they are blowing their chance to hit Obama how it counts.

                  • John_Frank

                    …. is that not their choice?

                    Some folks have obviously thought long and hard about this and even though they hold Obama in great disrepute, at least at this juncture they are simply not able to bring themselves to vote for Romney.

                    While some of the reasoning is suspect from my perspective, I can understand and respect where these people are coming from and why they feel the way they do.

                    As such, when you take an absolutist stance, all you end up doing is driving these folks away.

                    This election cycle has been a long and arduous road for many of us.

                    Even now I have strong misgivings about voting for Mitt Romney, although as I have previously stated, I am prepared to vote for him, because I have concluded that at day’s end Obama must be defeated and if Romney is elected at least it gives a chance of moving the country in the right direction.

                    Yes, some of the people who are not willing to vote for Romney were never willing to vote for him, no matter what.

                    However, given that this is a base election, and every vote counts, beating people over the head with the argument, "if you don’t vote for Romney, you are aiding Obama’s re-election" simply reminds many who are unwilling to vote for Romney why they hold him and the Republican establishment in such disdain in the first place, so making it even more difficult to persuade these people to cast their ballot for the Republican Presidential candidate.

                    Just my two cents worth.

        • wodiej

          do you think it is our duty to save our own damn country? You know, the one that millions of people have fought, bled and died for? obama stands against everything they sacrificed for.  If that isn’t worthy of duty, I dont’ know what is.

    • wodiej

      Sorry but have to agree w Mary Beth on this. Every person who doesn’t vote for Romney is essentially helping obama.

    • FlyoverGuy7

       You can be right and still be wrong. 

  • attydomsalv

    There is one fundamental difference between the two men – one loves America; the other, as his actions and words demonstrate, hates America and all she stands for.

  • IsraeliCojones

    Fantastic post, Mary Beth.

    I cannot vote in this Election. And I’m not a Romney supporter by any stretch of the imagination.

    But if I could, I would proudly vote for him just to do my share of skinny *ss kicking.

    And with a smile on my face.



       IC….for some reason, "not being a Romney supporter by any stretch of the imagination" doesn’t quite coinside with " I would proudly vote for him"….maybe it’s just me.

      • IsraeliCojones

        Yes it’s just you, because you conveniently forgot the rest of the sentence:

        just to do my share of skinny *ss kicking.

        I’m speaking of the Duce’s *ss here, if it wasn’t clear.

        I would be proud to kick his ass for real, but since the only way to kick his *ss is voting for Romney, then I would proudly vote for Romney just to kick his *ss.

        Are you following the reasoning?

        PS: And please don’t try to assert here that I’m a Romney supporter because even those who dislike me are going to laugh at you.

        • TENCOLE

          "And please don’t try to assert here that I’m a Romney supporter because even those who dislike me are going to laugh at you."

          IC, I would never say that to anyone posting here and I didn’t mean to imply you were. I apologize….unlike those who have said the same about me.

          • IsraeliCojones

            Well, it’s so remote from who I am that I’m not offended at all. :)

  • Lennart Bilén

    The foundational principle of this country is freedom of religion. From the Quaker State to the Mormon State freedom of religion has been the cord that bound us together as a nation. I believe Mormonism is a cult, as well as the Roman Catholic Church when they affirm the Pope is infallible when he speaks ex Cathedra, but I stand side by side with Romney and the Catholic Bishops in the defense of freedom of religion and sanctity of life.
    Obama (and Hillary Clinton) try to quench freedom of religion when they blame the Benghazi terror attack on the capital offense of criticising Mohammed.
    One thing I know: Romney loves America and religious freedom, Obama doesnt.
    I will vote Romney and Ryan.(I was toying with the idea to write in Sarah Palin as a protest vote, but since Pennsylvania is in play I will thankfully cast my vote for Romney)

    • CBDenver

      Thanks so much for considering that PA is in play and voting accordingly.   Colorado is also a swing state and you can bet I voted for Romney against Obama. 

  • $8196935

    Thank you for your common sense post Mary Beth.
    Romney not being my first choice, I will gladly vote for

    This is our last chance to save this country and
    that is not just a cliché but the hard facts.


      Yankee….The word "gladly" is what’s wrong with the whole situation. 

      • Mary Beth House

        Proud and gladly does not have the connotation that I think you’re assuming.

        I’m gladly rushing to the polls tomorrow to vote for Mittens.  I’m proud to cast a vote to remove Obama.

        That doesn’t mean I’m excited about Mitt…merely that I’m delighted beyond measure to level a crippling blow to Obama and if that blow comes in the form of someone I don’t care for?  So be it.

        At least that means no more O.

        • TENCOLE

          Then tell me May Beth…what connotations do "proud and gladly"  have, other than what it means?

          • Mary Beth House

            Exactly what I said.  My sense is you’re attributing the terms to the method rather than to the outcome.

            I proudly and gladly support a Romney victory in this instance because I proudly and gladly support an Obama defeat.

        • Leroy Whitby

          Good to see you back after the "primary wars." 

      • IsraeliCojones

         Obama is what’s wrong with the whole situation.

  • qtdb7

    If the 2 LOSERS (Obama and Romney) are the best
    America has to offer, then We the People are SCREWED. I feel like
    being given 2 bowls of SH*T and asked to choose one.

    • Mary Beth House

      Not really an apt analogy.  One is a bowl of poopie and the other is a bowl of mud.

      With the latter, we get a malleable substance that we at least have a chance to forming to our will.

      With the former, we get dysentery and e.coli. 

      Not that hard of a choice after all.

      • Nancy6

        Mary Beth,
        "One is a bowl of poopie" makes me laugh!
        Thank you!:)

        • IsraeliCojones

          Where the h*ck have you been???

          • Mary Beth House

            If she’s anything like me, she’s just been tied up with the business of life. :D

            • IsraeliCojones

              Yeah, OK.

              But we need her on Election Day/Night, right?

              An Election thread without Nancy is not worthing it.

              • Mary Beth House

                Without question.  I hope to see all Palinistas on deck tomorrow night!

                • TENCOLE

                  Am I invited?  Despite what others believe, I am a Palinista…..and damn proud of it.

                  • Mary Beth House

                    All Palinistas.  Even ones we don’t always agree with all the time. I don’t think you’re not a Palinista, I just disagree with your position on this.

                    Heck if 100% total agreement were the measurement, I’d be here by myself with only my imaginary friends to keep me company!  ;)

                  • CBDenver

                     Yeah — even ornery, cantankerous Palinistas like you Tencole!  :-).  I will save you a seat next to me..

                  • wodiej

                    since you are not supporting the Republican ticket, why would you want to be?

              • Nancy6

                Hey IC,
                I’ve been kinda around, mostly on Twitter these days.
                Thanks for asking!:)

                • IsraeliCojones

                  You’d better be there on Election Night!

                  For us! For country! For Sarah!

                  For the childreun!

                  I’m counting on you.


    " Please understand…I’m not calling anyone out here since, indeed, I’ve read similar comments elsewhere that led to this OpEd."

    MaryBeth……for some reason, I’m just not buying this statement. ;)

    • Mary Beth House

      I figured you might not but truly I’ve been planning on writing this for a couple of months and wanted to time it for right before the election.

      That we happened to have had a similar back and forth this morning was serendipitous.  lol

      • TENCOLE

        Mary Beth, I know it’s too late, but if I had written a contrasting piece, would it had been posted?

        • Mary Beth House

          I have no idea but I suspect that if it were posted, there’d be a counter-counter piece rehighlighting how our choices are one or the other and that there is no third option.

          • TENCOLE


            • Mary Beth House

              How is it a cop-out? It’s REALITY. 

              There is no other way to get rid of Obama.

      • FlyoverGuy7

         Mary Beth, it needed to be said.  And heard.  And fully understood.  We need all hands on deck on Election Day. 

        And I hope people who have the chance to vote for a Republican candidate for Senate do so.  It’s the only way we can break the iron-fisted control Harry Reid wields over the Senate agenda, and thus the only way we can have a chance to repeal ObamaCare. 

        I realize what this means for Palinistas in MO and IN.  As distasteful as it might be, it’s crucial we strip Harry Reid of his Majority Leader gavel.  After 2013, ObamaCare will effectively become permanent forever, so will be our one and only chance.  This is HUGE. 

  • DocBarry1

    Mary Beth – it so good to have you posting again –

    I encourage everyone to read Gov Palin’s post – I continue to stand with Governor Palin and may God continue to Bless America – please vote out obama – remember Gov Palin’s statements ABO – tomorrow is the day – finally!

  • Laddie_Blah_Blah

    Agree 100%, Mary Beth. Obamacare will go, and energy development will be a top priority. The government needs down-sizing and regulations need to be cut. Tax reform is high on his agenda, although I want to see that one before I believe it.

    Above all, he knows that small business is at the heart of the USA’s free market capitalism, and will do as much as he reasonable can to promote its development and success. Apple started out as a small enterprise, and Walmart was a local department store long before it became a global giant.

    Obama has no clue about any of it when it comes to practical problem solving. His head is still mired in Ivy League faculty lounge group think, where the whackiest theories all seem to make so much sense, until he tries them out. 

    Windmills? They were made obsolete by the steam engine. The electric car? It was made obsolete by the invention of the internal combustion engine. Ethanol? Even Al Gore now concedes that ethanol technology is largely counter-productive and does more damage to the environment than energy from oil and gas. When you are an even slower learner than Al Gore, it is time to take a teaching position at Harvard, because they are the only ones who are still that far behind the times.

  • Palinchick

    Any ‘Palin supporter’ not voting for Romney is NOT a Palin supporter. Wake up. The Marxist must be voted out.

    • Mary Beth House

      I think that’s a bridge too far, Palinchick.  I understand why people are hesitant to support Mitt but I hope they can set that aside for the sake of our Republic and I don’t believe that those struggling with this issue are somehow no longer supporting the Governor.

      • wodiej

        I disagree. Gov. Palin’s goal is to get obama out of office.  If they are not supporting that, then why are they even here? 

  • CBDenver

    Four more years of Obama will be the death of America.  Even if Romney is not your ideal candidate, he is far superior to Obama.  There really is no other viable choice than to vote Obama out of office.

  • GetWhatYouPayFor

    Anyone who backs the GOP is committing suicide as well. Just slower and to some, less objectionable. Dead is still dead.  You are correct that this election is not about Romney. There is no glory in defeating a clearly inferior opponent.  His inglorious victory will indeed help destroy the GOP albeit on a slower pace than a loss to the worst President of all time would accomplish. The disgusting prospect is that his loss might well doom the Republic we vote in. So yes, those whose conscience allows should vote for the weasel because he is better than the Devil. He wins nothing in my mind because as you stated, this election is not about him.

    • Mary Beth House

       I strongly disagree.  With a Romney win, we have a chance to regroup.  Sure we’re heading for the cliff, but at least we’ll have a chance to steer away from it rather than plow over the edge.

    • John_Frank

      Strongly disagree.

      If Obama is reelected, by the end of his second term we will be fully ensconced on the Road To Serfdom.

      If Romney and the Republicans win, we have a chance of not only stopping the socialist agenda, but actually recovering some of our lost freedom with the repeal of Obamacare.

      That written, the day after the election, the strategic detente with the Republican establishment ends.

      If Romney and the Republicans win, but fail to do a number of things, including but not limited to repealing Obamacare, then yes, the Republican party can go the way of the Whig Party; and I will for one will join in the hastening of the demise of the GOP.

    • wodiej

      Apparently you don’t care if the Republic is doomed.  

    • FlyoverGuy7

      "Anyone who backs the GOP is committing suicide as well."


      So there is no point in struggling to stave off complete disaster?  By your reasoning, since we are all going to die eventually, why even bother to struggle through life?  What is this???????

      We are humans.  We fight for certain things, even though the odds may seem hopeless.  Where is your fight?

      Are you seriously willing to risk total, utter disaster for our country just to try to speed replacement of the GOP? 

      Get real!

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets