What's Hot | Search |

Get Your Personal
On-Air Report Here
Monday, February 25, 2008
Kevin McCullough :: Townhall.com Columnist
Why No Vote Is No Option
by Kevin McCullough
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 

Statements made or actions taken by prominent evangelical leaders implying that Bible-believing Christians would be best served by sitting out this election cycle are not only unhealthy to the welfare of the republic, but antagonistically sinful. No Bible-believing Christian can in good conscience avoid the voting booth--it's anti-biblical, and it equals defiant disobedience.

When John McCain began the surprise winning streak of the political season back in New Hampshire, I began to wonder what the power players on the evangelical right would do, say, and encourage others to do as it related to the General Election of 2008, should John McCain turn out to be the nominee.

I didn't have to wait long.

On the opening day of CPAC, en route to Washington from New York, I, of course, had talk radio on in my car. Fox News Radio's Brian and The Judge were talking that morning about how McCain's speech would go over at CPAC later that afternoon. They were all but acknowledging that Mitt Romney was to address the crowd that morning, choosing instead to focus on the topic of "what must McCain say" to win over the hearts of the conservatives gathered.

Then an odd thing happened. The news broke that Romney was dropping out and a seismic shift occurred in the focus of the discussion. It was then apparent that McCain, now more than ever, needed to work even harder to persuade the conservative base of the GOP party that he would champion their issues.

Brian and The Judge brought on Pat Robertson, who had only weeks earlier endorsed the now vaporized candidacy of Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Robertson spared no words. John McCain had lashed out at him personally only a few years earlier and it was obvious in the tone, demeanor, and sound of Robertson's voice that he would have none of it. No voting for John McCain--done deal.

He also intimated that it might be the kind of election year where the founder of CBN decided that voting at all was just a bit much this go around.

Later that day, no doubt somewhat impacted by the sudden Romney withdrawal, Dr. James Dobson, another powerful voice to and for evangelicals in the political arena endorsed the candidacy of Mike Huckabee. His doing so caused many of us to recount how Dr. Dobson had already pledged never to support John McCain. Many of us who support Dr. Dobson agree with his rationale on why supporting a McCain candidacy is unacceptable.

What worries me is that as a result of these men's negative reaction to McCain's eventual nomination, the message they send to less astute observers of the political process is that voting is optional.

Many evangelicals might take their cue from these two disillusioned men and conclude that not voting, sitting this one out, or refusing to lift a finger in the general election is an acceptable response to a primary season that has yielded us the poorest choice for President in my lifetime, with perhaps the exception of the nomination of Bob Dole.

Many might conclude that in seeing two candidates such as McCain and Obama, who have both stood for the outright violation of the Constitution, that the nomination process is flawed and therefore wiping one's hands clean of it is a decision of conscience that could demonstrate a turning over of this process to God's judgment.

But they would be wrong.

And if Robertson or Dobson are encouraging such (and I'm not making the case that they are), then they should be rejected outright.

For a Bible-believing Christian to abstain from participation in the 2008 general election is to behave in a biblically disobedient nature. Oh sure there may not be as much to be excited about in this year's contest, but large issues do loom in the near future. If we as evangelicals remain silent as justices are seated on the Supreme Court, as our nation responds to jihadists who wish to injure. maim, and kill innocent people, or while our school curriculums begin to add homosexuality, bestiality, and every kind of sexual combination imaginable and refer to it as a family to the textbooks of our nation's school children we must understand that we play a part in allowing these things to happen.

In the Gospels Jesus compels his disciples to render to Caesar what is Caesar's. Meaning that Christians are obligated to participate in the function of civil government and life under the law as long as it does not violate the terms, principles, or instruction of scripture. To be sure, rendering to Caesar in our nation includes paying our taxes, but it means a good deal more as well.

Since Caesar in modern day America is you and me, then we are to play our part in the role of government faithfully. The very minimum of what that includes is the requirement to vote. To not exercise this simple obligation is to, by act and deed, NOT render to Caesar as Christ instructed.

Who you vote for, the rationale for why you support certain candidates, and the degree to which you show rabid enthusiasm for them or more passively hold your nose and vote for the lesser of evils, is up to you. But the act of voting in and of itself, is not. If you are a Bible believing Christian, if you are someone who uses the biblical text to govern the behavior, ethic, and integrity of your life, then you are someone--as an American--whose minimum requirement as it relates to government is to cast a vote.

There are many like me who are thoroughly disillusioned with the choices put before us in this election cycle. In one camp, you have an avowed leftist who will tax beyond anything resembling fairness, who will stand by while the slaughter of children continues unabated, who will seek to ratify the most radical of sexual agendas so as to redefine the very nature of family, and who will pretend to take action against jihadists by sitting at a table with them--all while they seek to plot his ultimate demise. In the other camp, you have a man who has assaulted the freedom of speech unlike any elected official preceding him, a man who does not see the threat to the American family in the radical sexual agenda that is being enacted, and a man who is unsure if a man's wages really do belong to the man who earned them. And for that matter, is even unsure as to whether our borders, in fact, belong to us.

The moral abyss that these two choices provide one with is striking and scary. Nonetheless, it is the evangelical Christian's obligation to make a choice and cast a vote.

Regardless of what "Christian Leader's" voice, newsletter, or television show it may come from, any word to the opposite is unbiblical, and must be rejected.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "'Xtreme' Radio and columnist based in New York. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com. His second book "The Kind Of MAN Every Man SHOULD Be" is in stores now.

Be the first to read Kevin McCullough's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

What in the world are you talking
about? Granted I agree with your characterization of Obama, and I am not thrilled with McCain, but your statements abou McCain should go in the dictionary under hyperbole. Since when is the difference of a few percentage points of a tiny tax cut "a man who is unsure if a man's wages really do belong to the man who earned them." If you really believe that all of a man's wages belong to him without any taxation, you should be for Ron Paul. But I don't think even you are that nutty. And I would be willing to wager you couldn't even name half the provisions of McCain Feingold. I'm sure it hurt your freedom of speech. Oh wait, it didn't. I don't like it either, but come on, you're ridiculous. And this line - "a man who does not see the threat to the American family in the radical sexual agenda that is being enacted" What in blazes are you talking about? McCain is far from perfect, but there isn't even a reasonable choice here. Every single bad point about McCain is multiplied 100 fold by Obama. You think Obama will prtect the borders? Can you say "Driver's Licenses for illegals." Heck, he's more worried about the Mexican economy than he is about ours.

I agree but...
It makes no sense to not vote. But you DON'T have to vote for the either of the liberal United Establishment Party. You can vote for "other" and dilute the winner's percentage to deny him a mandate. Rather than explain it all, I wrote my final political essay on this topic. Drop by if you are interested. Nothing nutty, I promise.

You Gotta Vote

Please do NOT stay home. You must vote. You do not have to vote for Hillybama or McAmnesty. There are always other parties and people on the ballot. You could write in Joe Oliva. The important votes are for House and Senate seats. Conservatives MUST win seats in the House. The House is where things get done. It was the passage of H.R. 4437, an enforcement bill, in Dec.05 that sparked the illegal alien protest marches and moved this issue to the front burner. It was the Senate that tried to jam amnesty down our throats. The D's that won seats in '06 were conservatives running on enforcement platforms. One of them, Heath Shuler D-NC, introduced the SAVE Act. Call, e-mail, or write your Congressman and urge support of this legislation. Enforcement is what Americans want, not amnesty.

Amnesty is a losing proposition.
I don't think Hillary is stupid enough to step in front of this bus.
McCain is.

You can always vote for Nader
But Obama will win because McCollough has it wrong.

Obama is pushing tax CUTS for the majority, not tax increases. That is good for the economy.

Obama is pushing for affordable health care for all Americans. That is good for all of us.

Obama is for going after jihadists in Afghanistan and Pakistan and not for shelling out billions for the next hundred years for nation building in Iraq. That is crucial for defending America.

Who knows what "sexual agenda" McCullough is talking about. I think Obama is against legalizing gay marriage if that is what McCullogh is worried about.

But you can always waste your vote on Nader if you don't want to vote for either McCain or Obama.

OT
Why is it that Mr McCoullough's articles are consistantly the most poorly written and copy edited on townhall? Does his new media enthusiasm prejudice him against having someone who knows how to type look over his manuscripts? Is it a matter of boneheaded principle or do the poeple who run TH just like seeing their least rigorous thinker embarrassed every time by his tortued sentences and D- punctuation?

Kevin, it is not
just evangelical Republicans who oppose McCain. It is my opinion that there are millions of conservatives, such as myself, who are most definitely not evangelicals and who refuse to vote for John McCain. I will vote, but I will not vote for him for President. I will write in Mitt Romney or Duncan Hunter. I will vote for any other conservatives down the ballot however.

I do not believe that McCain will govern conservatively by any means. He has sided with liberal Democrats on way too many issues and I do not think that will change if he were put in the White House. He may pretend to be conservative long enough to get voted for (GOP nomination or election) but once he has it....look out.

Now look at his latest reason for why he could lose (the election)...the war in Iraq. I wait with baited breath to see him do a flip flop on this any day now; just to cozy up with those anti-war Independents and Dems (the ones who are afraid of Hillary/Obama enough to vote for McCain) whose votes he will need to win (since too many conservatives are refusing to be GOP elite puppets.)I am still holding out for a brokered convention.

What encouraging words!!
The comments so far, not this poorly written and atrociously reasoned article......

I believe conservatives, evangelicals or otherwise (I am all 3 kinds of conservative), should vote in great numbers.....for conservative candidates in the House and Senate. Since there is no conservative presidential candidate, not voting for anyone, writing in a name, or voting third party are all acceptable becaue they may finally send the message that we are tired of voting for the lesser of two liberals.

Saving the Republican Party is the worst reason to vote McCain! I will be loyal to GOP when they are loyal to me.

Never before have the choices been worse for conservatives. But we must make sure that congress has enough conservatives to block all the liberal nonsense Hilary/Obama/McCain try to get passed. I think 4 years of absolute gridlock would be a really positive outcome of this election.

zzzzzzzzzzz

SingLOUD
Sounds good to me. Four years of gridlock, accompanied by such blatant and nauseating incompetence and narcisscism that even the most non-political of voters realizes that the current crew in DC must be thrown out. An election year with say, 50 per cent, rather than 90 per cent of incumbents returning to office would produce a sea change of attention to the public weal.

Consider this about Sen McCain...
Whether you're a conscientious evangelical or agnostic it should turn your stomach:

http://opensourceactivist.org/2008/02/06/bill-to-improve-he alth-care-in-mexico/#more-30



I didn't get past the first paragraph
What utter claptrap.

Chapter and verse, please, Mr. McCullough.

I am sick and tired of self-proclaimed Evangelical spokesmen confusing political affiliation with Faith. There is no religious obligation to vote. Period.

fascims is near
Of the three main candidates (with Obama being of islamo-fascism, Clinton of social-fascism (both sub-branches communism & nazism) Clinton, & RINO McCain of social-fascism (branch of communism)) there is no candidate that Constitutionalists would waste a vote on. Finding a true representative of our Constutional Republic will be difficult, though not impossible. Getting enough votes would be a different story. It appears that one of the fascists will win the election.

What garbage
Sometimes, regrettably, the most moral act is to abstain from abetting what is wrong or evil.

As for myself, I think I'll cast a vote for the Constitution Party in November. I can't quite bring myself to vote for a GOP candidate who considers me a bigot for wanting our borders secured.

As for a future with President Obama? Americans will find that "change" is not necessarily synonymous with "better".

Anti-socialist
What form of fascism do you support? Or are you a conservative communist? Are you a constitutional fascist?

Hillary: Forget the Voters?

Hillary, “superdelegates should exercise their independent judgment, giving due consideration to their relationship with a candidate”.

WATCH VIDEO

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/hillary-forget-the -voters

I guess this flawed article
gives us the preview of what is to be seen as the McLame effort to reach out to conservatives and evangelicals.

"You gotta vote for me - It's in the Bible!"

I'm sure the pastor at my church will show me where that is.

voting
Why vote? It only encourages them.

Author is not endorsing McCain peeps
Before everyone gets their knickers in a knot, some commenters appear to be saying that the author is mandating votes for McCain. Please point out where that's the case?

Biblically errant not to vote?
You must be Roman Catholic, Mr. McCullough, because your conclusion that not voting is 'unbiblical' is certainly not based on exegetical scripture reading. In context, the reference of "rendering" was based on the question of paying taxes. The government requires tax paying, it does not require voting. Ergo, any one, Christians included, may vote or not depending on his conscience, your pathetic attempt to make scripture stand on its head notwithstanding.

Prove your claims author!
The author states: "For a Bible-believing Christian to abstain from participation in the 2008 general election is to behave in a biblically disobedient nature." By what book and verse does this come from. Rendering to Caesar is strictly about taxes, not voting! Your stretch is pathetic at best!

Please anybody who wants to prove a point when referencing biblical principles must, must have book and verse referenced, otherwise it's only mere opinion AND judgement as to what sins one is committing.

This author did nothing but pass judgement on those who will not vote for a President.


Damned If You Do
Damned if you don't. As long as McCain is hell bent on amnestying 15 million Democrats what difference does it make who destroys our country?

As soon as they start voting, our country will become a socialist welfare state and Republicans will be banished for 20 years.

So... voting for any of the three will destroy our country. Yet it is sin not to vote? Baloney!

Bottom Line
Those who want to keep this country safe, continue on the offense in the war on terror, reject the socialist and mega-government plans of the Democrats, and continue the pattern of nominating conservative justices to the SCOTUS, will vote for McCain. Those who would put their differences with McCain ahead of their country's future, however few they may be, will sit this one out or waste their vote on a different candidate. You can reason it however you like, but that's really what it comes down to in this election; there are stark differences between McCain and the the Democrats that rational thinkers see very clearly.

Flip Flop
I have been flip-flopping more than Mitt Romney. First, I said I would vote for the conservative. Since there is none, I was going to vote for Hillary because there was no way in hell I would vote for McCain. Since Hillary is going to lose, I thought about voting for Obama. Again, anyone but McCain. Now, the more I look at Obama, the more he looks like the devil himself. His history makes Hillary look like a conservative. So, I said I'll just stay home in November. But, after reading this article and some of the comments, I think I'll write in Ron Paul. Any way you look at it, we are screwed for the next four years. The only hope for conservatives is to vote in a conservative Republican Congress, if there is such a thing, to impede any socialist agenda Hillary, Obama or McCain try to shove down our throats.

bigkam
McCain has fought us every inch of the way for the last 20 years. Give him the power of the White House, no telling what he'll do. We know amnesty and open borders will happen in his first year. He's already sounding like the far left with his global warming rhetoric, and that he will bend to international pressures. I will take Hillary over McCain because she is so radical that none of her agenda will be passed, just like HillaryCare. But with McCain, people think he is less dangerous, so they let their guards down. And before you realize it, he'll sign more liberal bills than you can shake a stick at. I say McCain is another Gerald Ford. Look at the damage Ford did in just two years, giving us John Paul Stevens on the Court.

Wrong depiction
The issue is not whether to vote or stay home. There is more on the ballot than the Presidential election.

The proper action is to go vote, and vote for the issues or people who come reasonably close to what you want to see. Since government won't put a "none of the above" choice on the ballot, when you get to a vote for which none of the choices are suitable (such as McCain vs whatever Democrat), just choose neither. If your state has the voting rigged to force you to make a choice on every issue/race, then write in who you'd like to see, or perhaps "None O. T. Above".

Then go out and buy your "Don't blame me, I voted for Huckabee" bumper sticker to deflect blame for the next 4 years.

not a very good article
the author misses the point that in spite of what he says there will be plenty of us conservatives in the voting booth come election day. We will first and foremost be voting for conservatives like us which will appear on the ballot box for our local and statewide offices. since at this point no conservative will appear to be presented by the GOP for president if McCain is the nominee, we will vote for a qualified individual who best represents us. For me, it will be a third party candidate.

I think it presumptious of the author to assess this as strictly a Dem/Republican vote. The last four Presidential elections were ultimately decided by third party candidates which twice denied Bill Clinton majority votes and gave us very close elections in favor of Bush.

This party myth promulgated by the GOP establishment shows the air of disregard for us common voters, who believe in issues and values, and we will not blindly follow a party that does not represent those to us.

not a good article
the author misses the point that in spite of what he says there will be plenty of us conservatives in the voting booth come election day. We will first and foremost be voting for conservatives like us which will appear on the ballot box for our local and statewide offices. since at this point no conservative will appear to be presented by the GOP for president if McCain is the nominee, we will vote for a qualified individual who best represents us. For me, it will be a third party candidate.

I think it presumptious of the author to assess this as strictly a Dem/Republican vote. The last four Presidential elections were ultimately decided by third party candidates which twice denied Bill Clinton majority votes and gave us very close elections in favor of Bush.

This party myth promulgated by the GOP establishment shows the air of disregard for us common voters, who believe in issues and values, and we will not blindly follow a party that does not represent those to us.

A "no" vote is a vote for Dems.
McCain may not be perfect but

1) he has never had an earmark

2) has voted consistently for tax cutting save the 2003 tax cut, which is more about his personal animus toward Bush, than his conservatism

3) he has an ACU rating of 83%, not an A but a B

4) he is ready to be commander in chief which neither Dem. is

5) he has changed his position on the borders

You are not going to get better at this point for the Reps. Take what you can get.

A Dem. regime for 8 years will raise your taxes, raise your energy bills, give you $5-6 a gallon gasoline, steal your medical history for national health, garner your salary to pay for the theft, pass the unFairness Doctrine and limit your posts on TH, cause military disaster in the Middle East, and let Islamic terrorism spread unabated throughout the world.

Anything is better than that.

Voting For Senator McCain
You are wrong about voting for Senator McCain. You are right that we need to vote, there are many offices down the ticket that will make a difference in how we are governed. If you are thinking that Senator McCain will be the lesser of two evils, think again. He has shown himself to be as left of the mainstream as almost anybody. He has also shown that he has ethical problems, not only with his actions with the lobbyist [I agree he did not have an affair, but his other actions were definitely unethical] but also with other things such as the Keating Five.

Senator McCain is unworthy of ANY Federal office, and definitely unworthy of being our President.

I will definitely vote, but will either vote for the Constitutionalist candidate or not vote the top of the ticket.

renny
McCain did use his vote to dis Bush as often as possible, and what does that say about him? Certainly that he is not a serious leader.

But he voted against the tax cuts because they "favored the rich". His recent ACU rating is much lower (65). He actually has the lowest rating of any republican senator in the past few years. He approached the dems in 2000 about changing parties. He approached Kerry, not the other way around.

He HAS NOT changed his position on illegal immigration - he will stll sign the bill if presented. It has his name on it!

McCain wil give us huge gasoline taxes in the name of globaloney. He hates talk radio - he won't fight against the fairness doctrine - did you so quickly forget how he feels about the 1st amendment?

You reasons for voting for McCain are lame at best.



PC
Let's not leave out the 2nd Amendment. Remember his battle against gun shows?

Not so fast...
Renny, your claims about McCain don't quite cut it.

1) he has never had an earmark
How would you know? Earmarks are often anonymous, and with his clout in the Senate, he can get pork through without earmarks.

2) has voted consistently for tax cutting save the 2003 tax cut, which is more about his personal animus toward Bush, than his conservatism
He opposed them in 2001 and 2003. If he would let some personal grudge interfere with millions of Americans keeping their own money, do we really want such a childish person as President?

3) he has an ACU rating of 83%, not an A but a B
That is a lifetime rating. Over the last 7 years, the highest rating has been 65%. McCain is not a conservative.

4) he is ready to be commander in chief which neither Dem. is
How is he ready to be CIC? Reagan was a great CIC, and had no relevant military experience. McCain has stood against Bush on the war on everything but the surge. McCain wants to close Gitmo, stop waterboarding (which works) and treat the enemywith the same rights as a shoplifter in American criminal courts.

5) he has changed his position on the borders
Just in time for the election. He will change back as soon as he is elected. He still has never said he was wrong on the McCain-Kennedy Bill.

I'll still take "None of the Above" by not voting for President while I vote for other issues/candidates.

A McCain regime for 8 years will raise your taxes, raise your energy bills, give you $5-6 a gallon gasoline, steal your medical history for national health, garner your salary to pay for the theft, pass the unFairness Doctrine and limit your posts on TH.

"Shamnesty"
If you are against "Shamnesty," then fine, don't vote for McCain. Write in Michelle Malkin's name. She's the one who has led this nativist crusade.

McCain has now said he's committed to border security.

Just last week, BOTH Obama and Hillary said they would NOT build the fence. If either of them becomes President and gets a filibuster-proof Senate, you may get an immigration bill that includes ONLY a path to citizenship and NO border enforcement.

With McCain, you WILL get border security. If for no other reason than it's needed to fight terrorism.

A lot of folks here on TH are confident that if Obama wins, the Senate Republicans can filibuster him. They haven't looked at the numbers. Right now, the GOP is in danger of losing so many seats that the Democrats might, just might, get 60 seats in the Senate.

Then watch out. Obama will enact his ENTIRE program; and there isn't a single thing the GOP could do to stop him.


MSBassSinger
MSBassSinger writes: "How is he ready to be CIC? Reagan was a great CIC, and had no relevant military experience. McCain has stood against Bush on the war on everything but the surge."

And McCain was RIGHT, and Bush was WRONG. Had Bush listened to McCain, we would be in a MUCH better position in Iraq than we are now.

Have you ever worked for a real boss in a real job?

When your boss is screwing up, it is YOUR DUTY to point out alternative courses of action that may work better. If he can't accept that, quit. Go elsewhere.

I've worked for bosses just like Bush: They refused to listen when anyone pointed out that things were not going well. They equated independent thinking with disloyalty. They valued personal loyalty more than they did professional competence. In the end, I had to quit those jobs. No good can come from being managed by a boss like that.

In the military, a soldier MUST carry out all legal orders from his superiors, even if he regards them as stupid.

But we don't live in a military dictatorship. McCain, you, and I, are under NO OBLIGATION to slavishly follow Bush's orders. We do NOT work for him. We are taxpayers. He works for us.

Voters Not in Control
Like it or not the voters in this country are not in control of the fate of this country. Almighty God controls this world and everything in it. Maybe that is why we have ended up with no good choice for president. Just maybe, God has decided that He has had enough of the people of the USA ignoring His laws and living like the devil. Read through the Old Testament a few times and get a good understanding what happens to a nation that turns it back on God.

Yes, there are still Christians in this country who live the best they can for Christ. That doesn't mean that God will not punish everyone for our national sins. There were always true believers in Israel, but they had to suffer along with those who turned their backs on God.

I'll not vote for president because to do so would make me an accomplice to the evil all these candidates stand for. Mr. McCullough's take on rendering unto Caesar is way out in left field as far as I am concerned. This is typical of those who want to use the Bible to make a point and then take their references out of context.

The only thing that is going to salvage this country is for its people to repent of their sins and turn to Jesus Christ. Maybe living under a harsh, radical socialist government will be what it takes for the USA to mend her ways. Time will tell.

Anybody but McCain
I'm willing to suffer through four years of Hillary or Obama, just as I did with Jimmy Carter. The suffering led to great things. Hillary or Obama can do no worse than McCain.

Nativist? Hey Stevie, are you an illegal alien?

McCain was wrong, Bush was wrong
SteveL,

"And McCain was RIGHT, and Bush was WRONG. Had Bush listened to McCain, we would be in a MUCH better position in Iraq than we are now."

McCain was wrong, and Bush was wrong. McCain is 100% wrong on closing Gitmo and stopping interrogation techniques that work. Bush was wrong on nation-building, and reneging on his failure to fully prosecute the war. Bush was wrong in his failure to build up our military to fight this war (and be prepared for a Chinese war which looks quite possible) without using so many reserve and guard. McCain show no indication of changing that.

"Have you ever worked for a real boss in a real job?"
Since I was 13, and I've been a real boss. And I am a US Navy veteran. I knew officers (only a very small percentage of the ones I knew, thank the Lord) like McCain who were interested only in their own self-aggrandizement. Under the Constitution, no Senator is an employee of the President, so he is not Mccain's "boss". The President is the sole authority in the military. All Congress has the authority to do is close the purse. There is no "advise and consent" clause for the Senate on the prosecution of the war. If you need a copy of the Constitution, the Heritage Foundation will send you one for free.


One more thing...
SteveL,

"In the military, a soldier MUST carry out all legal orders from his superiors, even if he regards them as stupid."
Wrong. Members of the armed forces are duty bound to disobey any illegal order.

Rev McCullough......
No Bible-believing Christian can in good conscience avoid the voting booth--it's anti-biblical, and it equals defiant disobedience.


Please give me the Book Chapter and Verse from the Bible to back up your claim?? You really cant believe this is the answer to get Evangelicals to go to the polls for MCShame? Excuse me but Evangelicals are not Ignorant nor are they scared easily! I suggest you try another tactic and by the way a good plan for Reading the Bible through in the next year may help you better quote scripture to evangelicals.

MSBassSinger great points
This is such a stupid article I will not even stoop to comment on it. However, regarding the GE, I will be writing in Haley Barbour for president and voting for as many conservatives as I can on the rest of the ticket. I am not doing this to protest the Republican party's poor choice, I do this to save the Republican party from years lost in the political wilderness should McClame finally get to claim the White House. Say what you want about Obama or Hillary possibly taking away our rights, McShame is the only one who has already done so and fought vigorously in the courts to maintain McCain-Feingold.

Virginia Patriot is right, as usual.
Don't stay home in November! Punish McCain any way you think will make a difference to him. But VOTE FOR CONSERVATIVES IN SENATE AND HOUSE RACES.

Send $ to conservative candidates; polite notes
to liberal incumbents, telling them to change their ways.

If you're in Illinois you'll get a 2-page reply from Durbin, explaining how it's your own fault that illegals (I mean, undocumented migrants) are still coming into the country. Yeah, we the people never shoulda blocked that Comprehensive Immigration legislation.

MSbassSinger
Because I am currently laid up after surgery, I took the time to read your new contract with Amarica. Couldn't find too much to disagree with there buddy. I also read and agree with your comments here.

McCain can't be trusted, we are better off coming together to fight for a veto-proof Senate/House no matter who wins.

As your neighbor (Louisiana), and a 20-year Navy vet(retired SUPPO) and fellow bass singer (SBC music min) and huge southern gospel fan, I say, keep up the good work.

zzzzzzzzzzz

America, not Amarica
Sorry, I can spell, really I can.

zzzzzzzzzz

We must vote the lesser of two evils?
What kind of nonsense is that? The reason our beloved nation is in such a mess is because that is what we have doing over and over again year after year. How does that give us a different result? It will only be more evil! Is that the duty of Christians?

We have been scammed by the elites of both parties into believing that we have no other choice, nowhere else to go and it has given us extreme partisanship instead of leadership in Washington. If our nation needs help, hiring the same elites once again will not do it.

The elites have cleverly rigged the election process to assure themselves continued power, and they have divided us into false ideological opposing camps of liberal/conservative. We need to break up this cozy little power duopoly that they have created for themselves if we want to reclaim our inheritance.

I urge you to visit my website, JOEOLIVAFORPRESIDENT.ORG, and see how the elites have managed to dupe us into once again trusting them. We should not trust them, and it is not our Christian duty to vote for the lesser of two evils. In fact, it is our duty to select a President who will defend the freedom of our nation and promote the rights of the people to determine how to govern themselves as a free people. Check out the site, why not? The elites have robbed us of our birthright and we should be about the business of reclaiming it. That is our duty! Thanks, Joe

Kevin, you're really reaching...
"Render[ing] unto Ceasar" doesn't mean not voting is "un-Biblical." Voting is a decision made by the individual for A, B, C, D or "None of The Above." Choosing not to vote because, in good conscience, you cannot vote for either candidate, whether for religious or political reasons, is an individual perogative. And your scaremongering doesn't help your arguement.
Grow up and lay out the facts on why any Conservative should vote for J-Mac, other than the lame "because he's not Hillary/Obama" arguement.

No marching orders
I'm an evangelical Christian but I take no marching orders from Pat Robertson, James Dobson or other so-called Christian "leaders". I won't vote for McCain, period. With the possible exception of national security, there's not a scintilla of difference between Obama, Clinton and the real McCain. And I say "possible exception" in the national security arena because anyone who wants to shut down Gitmo, stop waterboarding, and grant civil rights to islamic terrorists captured overseas, well, they're just not right. I won't go so far as to do like some and call him the Manchurian Candidate, but I sure don't want his hot-tempered finger on the button in a time of crisis...

Marching orders...
I'm an evangelical Christian but I take no marching orders from Pat Robertson, James Dobson or other so-called Christian "leaders". I won't vote for McCain, period. With the possible exception of national security, there's not a scintilla of difference between Obama, Clinton and the real McCain. And I say "possible exception" in the national security arena because anyone who wants to shut down Gitmo, stop waterboarding, and grant civil rights to islamic terrorists captured overseas, well, they're just not right. I won't go so far as to do like some and call him the Manchurian Candidate, but I sure don't want his hot-tempered finger on the button in a time of crisis...

VERY bizarre column
The act of actually refusing to cast a presidential ballot, if done purposefully, is a very strong statement of conscience, and is in fact a vote.

Further, though implied and not stated outright, McCullough's essentially trying to justify a "lesser of evils" vote for McCain.

Otherwise, my showing up and writing myself in would meet his "criterion", but I'll bet McCullough wouldn't see it that way.

Further, voting for the "lesser of evils" is still a vote for "evil".

I also found his use of the "render unto Caesar" quote completely fraudulent. The Biblical quote was referring to coinage and taxes. Trying to stretch it to cover voting goes way beyond credibility.

The Bible has nothing to do with voting,
..but the Declaration of Independence does.

At the end of the DoI are the words: "..we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor." followed by 56 signatures of endorsement. To vote is to add your own endorsement to this Declaration. Even if you vote "other", it is still putting your initials to the DoI.

If you "stay home", think of this: The soldier who laid wounded on the battlefield, from 1776 through all the conflicts of this country to Iraq and Pakistan, will have suffered, in YOUR case, in vain. Don't break the faith with the dead! Vote! Even if it's to only vote for dog catcher! Even if you write in "Elvis" for president! Vote!

Election day for Americans is our National Sabbath. It is the day we convert unleavened bread, the Eucharist, and we are all "Re-Born Americans" when we vote. To stay at home is to refuse the cup of the blood of patriots that turned the sour grapes of tyranny into the wine of Liberty. Do not refuse this cup.

Kevin - McCain will win so no problem!
Note that the self righteous ultra conservatives (I mean ego-driven republicans)who won't vote for McCain make up less than 30% of the party. This is statistically insignificant and as proven by the primary nomination process - their participation does not change the outcome much. Also, as people begin to look at Obama and Michelle closely, they will inadvertently realize this is the most leftist couple to run for presidency and come election day - GOP will keep the whitehouse. Obama was endorsed by Farrakhan - SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!! Sane and rational americans can be trusted with electing McCain.

Sophie
Can only think and write one sentence at a time, huh? You need to get off the cocaine. It's eating away your mind.

Dear Sophie, "Immortal"
"Look how well it works for moslems with the Koran!"

To equate Jewish or Christian Scripture with the Qur'an is intellectually vapid.

Every act of unjustified violence attributed to Christianity was an organization (Roman Catholicism, Church of England, etc.) acting in direct violation to the clear teaching of Scripture.

Every act of unjustified violence attributed to Islam for the past 1,400 years was in keeping with the clear teaching of the Qur'an.

Christianity is defined who Christ is and affirmed by the Scriptures, not by the failings of fallable human beings and their organizations.

Islam is defined by its prophet Muhammed and affirmed by the Qur'an.

Equating them is just plain silly.

Sarah
Sarah: Note that the self righteous ultra conservatives (I mean ego-driven republicans)who won't vote for McCain make up less than 30% of the party. This is statistically insignificant and as proven by the primary nomination process.

Apparently, you are not old enough to have gone through too many elections. Since Reagan/Mondale, every presidential election has been decided by less than five points. Many were decided by a third party candidate taking votes away from the base, i.e. Perot, Nader. If you think 30% is insignificant, then you are truly delusional. Why is your man going around begging for conservative support, such as his pleading at CPAC and more resently, at the governors' convention? Us insignificants will make sure the rinest of RINO's won't get into the White House.

Things Are Rough All Over
While Republicans are wondering how they can vote for McCain without getting sick, Democrats are wondering the same thing should Hillary Clinton manage to snake her way to the nomination. Many of us Democrats went from "I like Obama better but Hillary is more electable" to "If Hillary manages to get herself nominated I will have to hold my nose and vote for her as the alternative is having McCain continue Bush's disastrous policies". Then Hillary's incompetence and vile tactics got worse, and we progressed to "O God, I will drop dead if I have to vote for Hillary".

Republican or Democrat, November 4 2008 could be a rough day. I suggest that all polling places be equipped with smelling salts and plenty of throw-up buckets. Paramedics should stand by.

Sarah postulates:
Tuesday, February, 26, 2008 12:14 PM
- McCain will win so no problem!
Note that the self righteous ultra conservatives (I mean ego-driven republicans)who won't vote for McCain make up less than 30% of the party. This is statistically insignificant and as proven by the primary nomination process - their participation does not change the outcome much.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Primary nomination process.
Wanna bet that McLame doesn't get the total quantity of votes in the general election that he receives during the primary?
I am willing to bet that the Dems/Moderates/Libs that crossed to vote in the Republican primary will not return to the (R) column come November.
And the 30% (or substantial portion) will not go there either. When the Dems are already (in turn-out) out voting 2 to 1, it will be ugly early in Nov.

But that's okay. Remember only you willing to sell out conservative principals are significant.

Hahahahahaha, Lilly
Yes, exactly!

I've had the vision of all the Dems showing up and voting for McCain while all the conservatives showed up and voted for Hillary.

I wonder who would win?

This is the Satureday Night Live election skit, in real life.


Okay, you convinced me
Since I have to vote or go to h*ll...


I'll vote for Hillary or Obama.

(We don't have write-in here in Oklahoma which I consider unConstitutional, but who am I...)


Happy now, McCullough? I'm voting!


The "Declaration", ModMark,....
...is what America aspires to be, the Constitution is the way to achieve it. "A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven {or a Declaration) for?”. Indeed.

Ever heard of context?
Sophie,

You quote is cherry-picked. In the OT, whenever such things occurred, they were 1) directly from God, and not from man, and 2) specific only to the time and place. The whole of Scripture is for us to live in peace and show love even to our enemies on an individual level. Violence is only allowed by an act of the government to defend its citizens, or by individuals to protect the innocent from immediate threat.

The Qur'an, in contrast to Scripture, has Mohammed (not God) telling Moslems to exact violence on all unbelievers at all times and all places, unless the unbelievers agree to submit to Shar'ia law and to Islam.

Again, your comparisons are a bit silly.

Christian nations have been the source of almost all the worlds education and healthcare, and defenders of the oppressed. Moslem nations have given us little more than violence and war.

Pro-torture?
If waterboarding a terrorist saves just one person from being wounded or killed, bring on the bucket brigade!

To call waterboarding torture is a vast overstatement. Waterboarding is to torture as Twinkies are to gourmet cuisine.

Again, you misquote.
Sophie, you just can't seem to get it right.

"Death to the Rape Victim (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)"

Note that Jesus showed them the error in their interpretation (since He was its author) - let the one without sin cast the first stone. And they all walked away, because all have sinned and come short of God's standard. The OT also teaches mercy and forgiveness, which is why stoning in those situations was rarely done. The Qur'an does not teach mercy and forgiveness.

Sophie, if you are going to quote Scripture, do it in context of Scripture. Satan tried the same thing you are trying, but Jesus called him on it. Context of the whole is always necessary.

Heresy
"No Bible-believing Christian can in good conscience avoid the voting booth--it's anti-biblical, and it equals defiant disobedience . . . "

So therefore to be Christian, one must vote for McCain?

Is this guy even Christian? He looks Jewish . . .

Heresy
"No Bible-believing Christian can in good conscience avoid the voting booth--it's anti-biblical, and it equals defiant disobedience . . . "

So therefore to be Christian, one must vote for McCain?

Is this guy even Christian? He looks Jewish . . .

McCain, Rodham or Husein? Hmmmm
I agree that "none of the above" would be the obvious choice. If offered as an option, I think many socially convervative democrats and independents would also vote for the same. I am willing to bet that none of the above would win this election with a clear majority.

If Obama is the DNC's choice, I would vote McCain as he is the lesser of two evils. But if somehow Hillary gets the DNC nod, then I will write in someone as McCain is probably worse than Hillary.

How in the heck did the RNC wind up with this bozo as its numero uno? I smell a rat. If the republican primaries were all held on the same day as the Iowa Caucuses, when we still had a choice for whom to vote, McCain would have come in dead last, yet here he is, the "Best"? we have to offer?

The RNC needs to be taught a lesson and the republican base can only do so by NOT voting for this RINO schill.

I'm going to write in Fred Thompson, who, in resprospect, held the highest conservative values of any of the candidates. I already have a don
e blame me, I voted for Thompson bumper sticker.

The wrong agenda for RNC
I think the RNC rigged the campaign to get McCain in because they thought he had the best chance of beating a Hillary in the general elections. Screw the constituency and who best represented their values. So now we end up with someone who might be able to beat Hillary, but will lose landslidesque to a younger, vibrant, Obama. The RNC is like the CDC that created a flu vaccine for the wrong viruses.

Write in anyone you want, so the RNC will know that we are there, and we do vote, but NEVER, EVER screw with us again.

I've had it...
with jacka$$es like this telling me I'm wrong to not vote. "Holding my nose" and voting for someone who was less than the ideal conservative, but more conservative than the Democrat is what got us into this mess, where the Republican nominee 1) believes in anthropogenic global warming and insists that we put an end to it, 2) admittedly doesn't understand economics, 3) not only voted for, but AUTHORED a campaign finance reform bill that is outright unconsititutional, 4) supports amnesty for illegal aliens, including immunity from prosecution for the crime of identity theft, 5) publicly pays lip service to the pro-life movement but privately thinks we should get a life, and 6) though he supports the war on terror, refuses to allow our interrogators to use whatever means necessary to get crucial intelligence from terrorists.

Has anyone noticed that, ever since Reagan, our nominees have gotten more and more liberal with every election? Why? Because we have held our nose and voted for them. If we want a REAL conservative nominee at any point in the future, we're going to have to REJECT the crap they are giving us.

lilly
That is probably the most thought provoking (and funny) post you have put here that I have sen.

Congrats.

One more thing
I really like how McCullough kinda glossed over that whole "Render unto Ceaser" thing. Go back and read your own dammed Bible, McHypocrit. Jesus said that IN DIRECT RESPONSE to a question about TAXES. He was not asked if the people should VOTE. He was asked if they should PAY TAXES. And even then, the only reason his answer even worked is because Ceaser's face and name were stamped on the coin. Ceaser's name and face are not printed on the voting booth, and neither are John McCain's. Moreover, taxes are a DUTY, something that must be RENDERED. Voting is a RIGHT, something that is ours to exercise, or not to exercise, if that is our choice. The Jewish people of that time had no right to vote anyway, either in the Roman government, or the KINGDOM of Isreal, before the Romans conquered them. And even in the Roman Empire at large, only the most elite had any power in government.

That said, I will probably vote for McCain. But I swear to God, if I see one more jacka$$ telling me that PRINCIPLED CONSERVATIVES are abandoning their party by not voting for McCain, forget it! It is the PARTY that has abandoned US.

The devil's advocate
Refresh our memories, Mr. McCullough. In what Biblical passages did Jesus instruct his followers to be political activists? In what passages did he instruct them make their political views known to the Romans? To agitate for political change? I think you are really stretching it.

Also, can you explain in what way "you and me" are "Caesars"? As an individualist/limited government advocate, I cannot understand that reference, or how you could allow yourself to make such a reference - unless you are not actually repulsed by totalitarianism. I am especially curious to know what you regard as "our part in the role of government," if I can figure out what you mean by that first.

The bottom line is that in a situation like this where we must choose between two collectivists in November, there is no right or wrong answer, because as an individual you cannot control other people to affect the outcome. If I show up to the polls to vote for a third candidate, it does not mean he/she will get elected. Each person should vote or not vote as their conscience dictates.

Innocent taxi driver...
Sophie, can you say "Nick Berg"? One really big difference between us and them is that the islamofascists intentionally torture and kill innocent people--the US doesn't. Are there occasional mistakes? Yep. But I would count on an Alex Gibney mockumentary to prove my case, any more than I would rely on a Michael Moore flick for information on health care. Are you a Pharisee or Sadducee?

NYT "hit piece" on McCain
The more I think about it, that so called "hit piece" alleging that McCain had an affair was probably run at the REQUEST of John McCain, or at least as an unasked favor to him. Think about it. What better way to get the conservatives behind a candidate like McCain than to have the mouthpiece of the left attack him? I initially wondered why the NYT would be so BLATANTLY biased on this. But now I know. They want to leave no question in the minds of the conservatives that they were unfairly attacking McCain. I'm sure they figured that the conservatives reallying behind McCain would be enough for him to finally clinch the nomination. They best hope it doesn't backfire and win McCain the White House. Or maybe that's their intention after all. Maybe they know he's the most liberal candidate on the ballot.

Correction
My earlier post should read "But I would *NOT* count on an Alex Gibney mockumentary to prove my case, any more than I would rely on a Michael Moore flick for information on health care."

warped Christianity
So "Bible-believing" = conservative? Do you believe that it is easier for a camel to pass throught the eye of a needle than for a wealthy man to enter the kingdom of heaven? In the "bearing false witness" category, this column yields "our school curriculums begin to add ... bestiality" (tell us specifically which school) and stand by while the slaughter of children continues unabated (ever heard of the Reducing the Need for Abortions Initiative passed by congress?). The "free speech" = money claim is a stretch, especially for a Christian.

The remark "a man who is unsure if a man's wages really do belong to the man who earned them" shows who really believes the Bible. The 8th chapter of Deuteronomy reads:

"17 You may say to yourself, "My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me." 18 But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today."

It really sounds like McCullough just wants a conservative and the Bible has nothing to do with it.

and I forgot...
"who will pretend to take action against jihadists by sitting at a table with them"

Ever heard of Zaccheus? How about "Blessed are the peacemakers"?

What a nutcase you are, Sophie
Your obvious attempt at moral relativism doesn't cut it. You've jumped from waterboarding to torture, a far leap, even for the intellectually dishonest. Be that as it may, I doubt even the looniest of your ilk would claim that the targets of waterboarding are "often innocent people".

Again, can you say "Nick Berg"? Or, closer to home, "September 11, 2001"? If waterboarding would have prevented either one, like I said earlier, bring on the bucket brigades.

Mr. McCullough
Of course we should participate in the election, but I don't see many people here or elsewhere indicating that they are just going home and stick their heads in the sand. I do see people considering not voting for one particular candidate. It would seem pretty judgmental to infer that a person who says "I can't in good conscience vote for that person" is "unbiblical" or "disillusioned", or some of the other derogatory terms you applied.

SNAFU
I'm entering this a little late, but as one of Sophie's "ilk", your view is shortsighted. You're familiar with the Golden Rule? I understand that axis forces in WWII were quite likely to surrender because they knew they would be treated humanely. I also understand we prosecuted Japanese war criminals for waterboarding. I fear for all captured Americans after this war.

Kevin
Your article is NON-SENSE.When Jesus said render unto Caesar,he was looking at a coin with Caesar's picture on it.This symbolism tell us, that his statement is LIMITED to TAXES.Also,voting is more than just for the people running,it is for the system they represent.Just maybe, the evangelicals feel, that by voting they "AFFIRM" a corrupt and sinful process.Therefore,by not voting they are voting,not to participate.UMMM...

A third-party vote is no vote at all
If you can't bring yourself to vote for either candidate this year, don't throw your vote away on a third-party loser.

Instead, use your brain instead of your emotions.

Think about:

1. Which candidate more closely aligns himself with your political philosophy?

OR

2. Which candidate's ideology might compel you to vote AGAINST them?

OR

3. If you were in the military, or your son were in combat, which candidate would you want as Commander-in-chief.

A non-vote or a vote for a third-party candidate is inevitably a vote for the person you like the least. Think, people, think!!

Third Party
Alaska,

You really miss the point, don't you. None of the remaining candidates aligns with my political philosophy. None of them are qualified as CIC, and I speak as a Disabled Vietnam Veteran. All of the remaining candidates would cause me to vote against them. What is left but to vote for Third Party candidate or not to vote the top of the ticket. Regardless of his words, Senator McCain's actions and voting record show him to be more leftist than Senator Clinton, and to approach Senator Obama. Do as you will, but I know what I see.

Only in your wildest dreams
Waterboarding hardly qualifies as *torture*. It's not comfortable, as I can personally attest. It's hardly torture.

Sophie, one of your own statements makes my case: "At one time Gitmo had over 700 detainees...now it has about half." If the situation had been reversed, and these detainees had been Americans in the hands of the islamoterrorists, would they have been released--or beheaded?

I've been to war, didn't much care for it. I've been present for *real* torture sessions, not by Americans but by some of our "allies". Didn't much care for that, either. But I don't live in a Pollyanna world, and everyone sitting in a big circle around the campfire and singing Kumbaya isn't going to win this war, won't stop the islamoterrorists from striking at America.

Look folks: you gotta stop believing everything that comes out of Gollywood. Want to learn what *torture* is? Dig a little into what the French did during the war in Algiers. Read up on the savagery and barbarity of the Japanese Unit 731. Waterboarding isn't even in the same universe.

slacker
Sorry I am here so late. Obama may support tax cuts for the majority but the "majority" doesn't pay squat in taxes. He will relentlessly tax the people that already pay the lion's share of the taxes. He will increase gummint giveaways like the EITC to further rob from the rich to give to the poor. When Robin Hood did it, he was reclaiming tax money taken from the poor for the benefit of the rich, when Dems do it, they are , unconstitutionally, extracting money from those that actually produce to give to those that do not or will not (and a few that can not but that it a very small portion). To sum it up, I will be working not just to support my family but several other families as well. I suppose that I will just have to be happy that they let me keep any of my paycheck, right Comrade?

Vote
Get out to vote. Vote for local, state and congressional conservatives. Do not vote for McCain and other back-stabbing RINOs. Do not stay home. KMC, this was a huge stretch and not at all what the Lord meant. You could have expressed this much more eloquently, with more brevity.

Isaldur, let me simplify, and Sophie...
If you would normally vote Republican, a non-vote or a 3rd party vote is really a vote for Obama-abortion-universal healthcare-tax increases-liberalism.

THAT's the point.

And Sophie, your posts and their accompanying absurdity/stupidity come closer to qualifying as torture than any waterboarding or any other coercive methods used by our military. Please stop it!!! lol

Alaska
You are not payng attention. Every time you vote for one of the lesser of two evil elites, you are giving them more power. It is like Chamberlain appeasing Hitler. The two parties now have so much power thet are no longer afraid of being held accountable. We will never stop the rape of this great nation by doing the same thing over and over.


Balderdash
You can't argue with success. Waterboarding works. Just ask Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, et al. I'll chalk up your ignorance to an utter lack of experience, sophie. As for the signatories you listed, I'm sure there is an equal or greater number of Generals and Admirals who believe Elvis is alive, too. In any event, flag officers are so many years removed from the foxhole that they have little memory of what does or does not work in the field.

Sophie, you strike me as one who loathes the military, but who--late at night when it's quiet and all those nasty demons come screaming at you in the dark--is secretly glad that someone other than Code Pink is manning the barricades.

2008 General Election
I agree that it is stupid not to vote. Voting is a right that should not be taken for granted. By the same token one should not vote for a candidate simply because it is a vote against another candidate. You should not vote for a candidate simply because that candidate belongs to a certain political party. It is that type of rationale that brought us to the predicament that we currently find ourselves in.
The candidate that you should vote for is the one that you believe would be the best candidate for our country.

Don't loathe the military?
Those who rant and rave about mildly aggressive forms of interrogation such as waterboarding are the ones doing a disservice to those who serve in harm's way. There is no valid excuse for not using such techniques, which have saved countless American soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and civilians from being maimed or killed.

Sophie, if you truly don't loathe the US military, why don't you support measures to protect them?

Jealous of officers? ROFL. I was permanently disabled before grabbing any stars, but our family reunions are filled with flag officers--most of whom are as I described, too many years removed from the foxhole to remember what works--or even care.

C'mon, admit it: you'd be happier if Code Pink was in charge of national security, wouldn't you?

GEN Petraeus is no fool
And neither did he condemn or even address the topic of waterboarding in that statement. Or are you engaging in some wishful thinking and reading into that statement something that you just wish he had said? I believe the latter.

Detainees do not meet the legal test of prisoners of war and, therefore, are not entitled to the rights afforded to POWs. That is, unless you can read something into the Geneva Convention that isn't there, either.

One supposes, though, that they aren't being treated with dignity. I read not long ago where the biggest health problem at Gitmo is the tremendous weight gain of many of the detainees, the result--for many of them, the first time in their lives--of actually having enough food to eat. Oh, the inhumanity!

McShame Is A Telemarketer
I was actually going to vote for him but if there is one thing I loath more than a politician, it's a telemarketing politician. His team of liars called my house in Texas TWICE on two different occasions and played a recorded message asking for my vote. By the way, if anyone thinks that their state delegates care about who you want them to vote for, I have a bridge in the desert I'd like to sell you.

Sophie, Immortal
Are these good conservative, "christian", "patriots" defending torture again?

SNAFU
What part of good guys do not torture don't you understand? NO professional officer worth anything will condone torture NONE

SNAFU
"I've been to war, didn't much care for it. I've been present for *real* torture sessions, not by Americans but by some of our "allies". Didn't much care for that, either. But I don't live in a Pollyanna world, and everyone sitting in a big circle around the campfire and singing Kumbaya isn't going to win this war, won't stop the islamoterrorists from striking at America."

Ahhhh now I understand. You let the side down lad or lady. Look admit it get counseling; get help. Do not try to rationalise it or keep the guilt inside. Please talk to a professional

"...Want to learn what *torture* is? Dig a little into what the French did during the war in Algiers. Read up on the savagery and barbarity of the Japanese Unit 731. Waterboarding isn't even in the same universe. "

Sadly yes it is. Look what was the result of what the French did? They lost Algiers and they lost thier honor. The Japanese were prosecuted some exactly for waterboarding.

SNAFU
"...There is no valid excuse for not using such techniques, which have saved countless American soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and civilians from being maimed or killed."

Actually no they have not on balance they cost more. Torture doesn't work. We abhor it not because of some moral principal but because it is a failure

"Sophie, if you truly don't loathe the US military, why don't you support measures to protect them?"

If you truly do not loath the military why did you stand bye and allow torture? You dishonor the uniform

"Jealous of officers? ROFL. I was permanently disabled before grabbing any stars, but our family reunions are filled with flag officers--most of whom are as I described, too many years removed from the foxhole to remember what works--or even care."

Ahhh so your failure of honor affects the family? ouch!

Blame America Firsters?
Sophie and other psychobabblers... if techniques such as waterboarding didn't work, why go to the trouble? If there's some kinder, gentler way of getting needed information, pray tell, what is it? And why isn't this panacea widely used? What makes you people think of waterboarding as torture? Compared to what, listening to a Grateful Dead concert?

Having said all that, if it took absolute, unrestrained torture of the most inhumane sort to extract information from a terrorist known to hold information that would prevent an attack of the sort that took place on 9/11, then I'm all for it. And you are, too. Either that, or you're lying here or to yourselves. The equation is simple: the "dignity" (or even the life) of a terrorist versus countless other lives. That's not such a tough decision, is it? Unless you're the sort that would be rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic...


SNAFU
"... if techniques such as waterboarding didn't work, why go to the trouble? If there's some kinder, gentler way of getting needed information, pray tell, what is it?"

It is the tried and true technices used throughout our history. Honey gets more info than terror -- simple fact

"And why isn't this panacea widely used? "

It is by all the good guys

"What makes you people think of waterboarding as torture? Compared to what, listening to a Grateful Dead concert? "

Trying to make lite of what you did or saw?

"Having said all that, if it took absolute, unrestrained torture of the most inhumane sort to extract information from a terrorist known to hold information that would prevent an attack of the sort that took place on 9/11, then I'm all for it. And you are, too. Either that, or you're lying here or to yourselves."

Sadly that knowledge is never there and do you really think you would give up the info if you were being tortured? What would you do?

"The equation is simple: the "dignity" (or even the life) of a terrorist versus countless other lives. That's not such a tough decision, is it? Unless you're the sort that would be rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic... "

Excuses do not work please get counseling please I am serious

Trevor, regarding
your 1:41 post, I agree. Actually I wonder if
the RNC "encouraged" (with McCains knowledge and agreement) the NYT to run that idiotic rumor/story? Seeing them (RNC) come out with a massive email/mail request for donations because "the mean old NYT was picking on McCain" is just a little too convenient for me. It smacked on John Edwards pleas for money when Ann Coulter wrote supposedly mean things about him.

It would also explain why McCain did not blow a gasket over the story as well, even though he faintly pretented to do so.

pretended, not
pretented!

Honey works fine...
When there's time enough, honey works fine. Often, there's no time.

Familiar with LTC Allen West and his story? I didn't think so. Google him and read it for yourself.

As far as counseling goes, I think anyone who would deprive the military or intelligence organs of this country the means necessary to obtain information vital to our national security is the one who needs to be hitting the shrink's couch. Soon.

I just voted; I guess I'm a
Good Christian.


I voted one dinky check mark on this stupid column.


SNAFU
"Familiar with LTC Allen West and his story? I didn't think so. Google him and read it for yourself. "

Are you him or did he use torture? The sight is nice I might even support him at a glance. Does he use or excuse torture?

"As far as counseling goes, I think anyone who would deprive the military or intelligence organs of this country the means necessary to obtain information vital to our national security is the one who needs to be hitting the shrink's couch. Soon. "

Please get help you are obviously hurting and morally bankrupt. If the end justifies what is the difference from you and Nazi soldiers or soldiers of the old Soviet Union? Answer: NONE

Kudos, Lilly
Thanks for the humor.

I predict that there will be a lot of people holding their nose on Nov4th.

In addition to barf-bags, there may be a run on Clothespins that day.

Hey, maybe that would make for some good BIPARTISAN symbolism - we can show that we protest the choices that we have before us by showing up to vote with Clothespins on our noses.

Hal Donahue
LTC West is a genuine hero. He fired his pistol beside the head of a captive Iraqi terrorist (posing as a cop) after telling him he was going to kill him. The bad guy wet himself and spilled his guts. Result? Three more terrorists captured by US forces and the end to an IED campaign, saving untold numbers of lives. But West wasn't "politically correct"--he didn't show enough "respect" and "dignity" to the islamoterrorist, I guess.

Yes, sometimes the ends do justify the means. Hiroshima and Nagasaki quickly come to mind. Horrific bombs which caused horrific loss to end a horrific war--and doubtlessly caused more than a little discomfort to those on the ground.

Compared to that, waterboarding is a walk in the park.

Political correctness will be the death of this country...

Hal Donahue
I happened to start reading a novel set in Spain during the Inquisition. This was not a great work of literature, just some ten-cent paperback I picked up at a yard sale. The plot involved the Spanish government trying to ferret out those who pretended to be Christians and weren't really. Referred to the Inquisitors, subjects received a treatment that sounded mighty like waterboarding---one end of a cloth was stuffed in their mouth and kept wet with dripping water so they'd think they were choking and drowning. I assume the author of this historical novel did some kind of research in order to establish verisimilitude in her fiction. The publication date of this book was 1974, long before the Bush administration. Summary: It sure sounds as if the Spanish Inquisition did use waterboarding, and I did not ever think to see the day when the government of the United States would be on a level with the Spanish Inquisition.

That's why many strongly dislike them
Pat Robertson, Jim Dobson, and their cabals.

Well, what can you say more?

Pat completely disregarded Giuliani's strong position on pro-abortion and moral baggages, and yet under no circumstance he would vote for McCain who is a strong pro-life, and hence, support Obama indirectly.

The evangelicals believe they are perfect beings which actually negates the main dogma of Christianity--that we are sinners, imperfect beings, and often commit sins and make mistakes.

For that matter, Robertson, Dobson, and their cabals are hypocrites.

And for the author to suggest that there is hardly any difference between Obama and McCain is utterly dishonest and absolutely ignorant which makes me wonder what is the basic requirement to have a blog on a website like Townhall. Perhaps even if you cannot think, you can have your blog on this site.

It is one thing to disagree with McCain but to suggest he is just another Obama is utterly dishonest.

lilly
"... Referred to the Inquisitors, subjects received a treatment that sounded mighty like waterboarding---one end of a cloth was stuffed in their mouth and....It sure sounds as if the Spanish Inquisition did use waterboarding, and I did not ever think to see the day when the government of the United States would be on a level with the Spanish Inquisition. "

The same goal different procedure. The goal is to cause the belief that you are sufficating..

SNAFU
"LTC West is a genuine hero. He fired his pistol beside the head of a captive Iraqi terrorist (posing as a cop) after telling him he was going to kill him. The bad guy wet himself and spilled his guts. Result? Three more terrorists captured by US forces and the end to an IED campaign, saving untold numbers of lives. But West wasn't "politically correct"--he didn't show enough "respect" and "dignity" to the islamoterrorist, I guess."

Don't recall the story but it was your morally relative bunch the Bush Regime who did it so they must be right????

"Yes, sometimes the ends do justify the means. Hiroshima and Nagasaki quickly come to mind. Horrific bombs which caused horrific loss to end a horrific war--and doubtlessly caused more than a little discomfort to those on the ground.

Compared to that, waterboarding is a walk in the park."

Sadly you disgrace your uniform and display a belief in moral relativism that boggles the mind. I stand by my previous statement: "Please get help. You are obviously hurting and morally bankrupt. If the end justifies what is the difference from you and Nazi soldiers or soldiers of the old Soviet Union? Answer: NONE"

"Political correctness will be the death of this country... "

Sadly the death of the country will be your ilk... PLEASE seek counseling! You desparately need it

STEVE L.
I am curious....What has Mccain ever done to make you believe he will tell the truth about anything? He told a group of business people, "I'll build their damn wall." Doesn't sound like a great endorsement to me. And answer me this; after he "builds the wall", what then?

This is about much more than the border, though. This is about a philandering, self absorbed liar. We had one of those kind as president.......Remember?
I will not vote for one simply because he calls himself a republican.

Sophie, Immortal 12:06p.m.
Stoning Cindy Sheehan because she's an adulteress?

We need THAT as a reason?

The Fall of KMac or is it now McK?
1. I am an Evangelical.
2. I am a Pastor.
3. I hold a Divinity Degree from Duke University.
4. I intend to directly challenge and rebut McK's premise(S) here.
5. I do not have the space to do so effectively, so check my blog tomorrow.
6. McK's basice premise is that it is a SIN (the in house technical term for "disobedience") not to Vote.
7. His primary proof text is "Render Unto Ceasar".
8. It DOES not follow that it is NECESSARILY the DUTY of a Christian to Vote. There is a WHOLE Theology of the Church--the Amish are an example--that says the FAITHFUL witness is the JUDGEMENT of WITHDRAWAL!
9. God does NOT deal in Moral Zero Sum games. There ARE times when ALL choices are evil and we MAY NOT participate in the imposed false dilemma.
10. By McK's own logic that we ARE HELD IN PART RESPONSIBLE for the OUTCOME of the Choices means WE SHARE in the EVIL when we "lay hands" on Evil Men (and women). In other words, we share in the sin of either Mac The Knife or Hillybama.
IN THAT case it would be a DUTY to AVOID participating in EITHER evil!

part 2 below.

the big mick

Stop with the "Caesar" misinterpretation
His remarks concerning "rendering unto Caesar" have nothing to do with our earthly responsibilties to pay taxes. Otherwise it would contradict Matt. 17:26

The coin He had them give Him had Caesar's image on it. It also had the statement that Caesar was a son of the gods on it. Jesus was making another of His ironic statements that NOTHING was Caesar's. It was ALL God's, but He said it in a way that they couldn't do a thing about it.

Man, these pseudo-teachers drive me batty.

FAll of McK part 2
1. At bottom, what McK is left with here is a bastardized version of Augustine's "Just War" Doctrine.
2. Simply, put that Doctrine says it is the Christian's Duty to run the calculation of: Is the Evil inherent in a course of action (Waging War) GREATER THAN, EQUAL TO, or LESS THAN the Evil inherent in NOT doing it. Is MORE EVIL PREVENTED by the Waging of the War than is CAUSED by its Waging. If you PREVENT a greater EVIL, than the War CAN BE, MIGHT BE, JUST, under certain specific circumstances.
3. What McK does is present us with a false dilemma of the Lesser Evil Candidate.
4. This IGNORES the POSSIBLITY that GREATER GOOD might actually be accomplished by NOT VOTING AT ALL as a means of ACCOMPLISHING something else! "Sending a message". "Taking a stand." All SORTS of things.
5. If both choices are Evil Poison, one slow, one fast, NOT drinking MAY be a Choice.
6. By the relentless logic of his own argument, however, McK MUST be forced into choosing the Candidate who is "closer" in some unspecified sense to Christian Principles--ie do less evil.
7. That this is The McAin't is not disputeable.
At the very least The McChurian Candidate's stand on Abortion has been fairly consistent, as is his stand against the Sandnazis.
8. I reject this backassed reasoning toward McAin't. And reason he is the GREATER of the two evils.

part 3 below.

mick

McKpart 3
I believe that Christians in a Constitutional Republic ARE tasked (Rom.13 is a better text) with the Responsibility of Just Governing.
I beiieve our Founders argued that all legitimate Government flowed FROM the rights Divinely and inalienably bestowed on the Individual. So, in short, we are guilty of our Government because "THEY" is "us"!
[see below for a MAJOR aside here--this principle leads to ONE of the choices OUTSIDE McK's false dilemma of Hillybama or Mac]

So I agree with McK that it is our Christian Duty to try and figure out what is best for the Republic and Our Neighbors (fellow CITIZENS--NOT ILLEGAL ALIENS) here and TRY to make that happen.

I consider Mac Socialism Lite and a MORE CERTAIN DEATH for the Republic because it accustoms the victim to the poison until the fatal dose is absorbed.

HIllybama is Socialism straight, and I believe there is a CHANCE the Republic will choke on it an puke it up!

My Christian Judgement is that there is a better chance for the Republic's SURVIVAL under Hillybama.

My duty is clear.

mick

Outside McKs false dilemma leadn 2 Mac
"When any form of Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the RIGHT* of the PEOPLE to ALTER OR ABOLISH IT and to INSTITUTE NEW GOVERNMENT."

*I argue that it is not JUST the RIGHT BUT the DUTY of Christians in a Republic to undertake such altering or abolishment when such Government DOES become destructive of the Divinely Given Rights!

I suggest that it is a least conceivable and POSSIBLE that it is the DUTY of Christians in our Present on the Brink of Socialism Society to begin to consider, plan and prepare and maybe even Pray for REVOLUTION!

If so either a vote FOR hillybama or for a third party or a boycott, might be legitmate Christian Obedience on behalf of the Good of the Republic.

McK is WRONG.

And if this is just an excuse to justify caving in to the McHos-ers than I am VERY dissapointed in him. I will not accuse him of that however. That would be bearing false witness. His concern may be genuine.

mick

Laura
Trying to be cute.

@ Kevin McCullough
Kevin:

I think its appropriate NOT to vote if you dont see a candidate that stands for approximatelyy 65% of what you believe to be moral and wise.

However, I personally will be voting for McCain
becasue he is moral and reasonably wise-imo

But, I dont think voting is rendering to Caesar-which is the government-unless the government mandates that you MUST vote.

In such a case then yes, we must *render meaning obey the law/government/Caesar.

jmo





*sigh*
another one ripe for the Mark.

A vote for X is a vote for Y
I get so tired of hearing this. I voted for Huckabee in VA's primary. I did NOT vote of Clinton or Obama. Everyone was saying that a vote for Huckabee was a vote for Hillary/Obama. But neither Hillary nor Obama were on the GOP primary ballot, at least not in VA. I looked. They weren't on there. I voted for Huckabee and no one else.

Now they're saying "a vote for no one is a vote for Hillary/Obama". That's BS also.

But how about this? All you McCainiacs KNEW that the conservative base would not vote for your boy. Yet you voted for him anyway, knowing the base wouldn't come out for him. So it is YOU that voted for Obama/Clinton. We TRIED to warn you that we weren't going to vote for McCain in the general election, but you just wouldn't listen. Instead, you WASTED your vote on a jacka$$ that can't even turn out the vote in his own party because he spends too much time in the Senate voting AGAINST his own party.

It's not too late
McCain hasn't clinched the requisite number of delegates yet. If all the remaining States go to Huckabee, and Romney and Giuliani give their delegates to him, he can still win it. You McCain supporters have been warned that we in the conservative base are not going to vote for McCain in the general election. And you know he can't win without us. So now the ball is in your court, at least those of you in States that haven't had their primaries yet. Huckabee is the only candidate left that we will vote for in the general. So, at this point, a vote for McCain is a vote for Clinton/Obama. We're not "getting off our high horse" for the party's sake, when the party refuses to get ON the high horse for OUR sake (or its OWN sake for that matter). So why don't you just join us up here, and force the party back into the saddle?

Not sure if this has already been said
cause I do not feel like reading 160 posts right now... but McCullough is SUCH an idiot. If it were CUMPULSORY to vote were it law, then maybe I could see his contention Christians would not be rendering unto Caesar and all, but if you take what McCookie says literally, then every time a Christian breaks ANY law in ANY way, even a simple traffic violation, he would be failing to render unto Caesar what Caesar demands. I am betting that Mr. McCullough is no better than the rest of us in that regard, so he needs to quit throwing rocks from his glass balcony...

My personal opinion is, Jesus's teachings center mainly on intra-personal relations - the only mention of civic duty IS that passage on Caesar, IIRC... and nowhere do I remember seeing anything on country-to-country type relations. Why? Because God does not care about countries... they all come and go. God only cares about His People...us. Government, Democrat, Republican, even Liberal or Conservative - means diddly squat to Him. All that really matters to God, IMHO - are we willing to work with Him or not? We do not always have to "behave in a biblically disobedient nature".

What a self-righteous doodah.

excuse me
We do not have to behave in a biblically obedient nature - should not have used thr exact quote. But I think most of the folks here get my point - that none of us are perfect, and McCookie's contention we will be blatantly sinning and being disobedient to God is nothing more than a pathetic guilt trip to go vote, because he sees as I do Obama clobbering McCain due to McCain's vast unpopularity.

Christians required to vote
You certainly have the right to express your opinion about the upcoming election. Here's the deal: where were you and the other media when the candidates were being covered? Gov. Huckabee has been consistently ignored and marginalized during the campaign. No one can state concrete factual objections to his viability. The mainstream media and the GOP have attempted to stuff one candidate down our throats. Forget it - I will write in
if allowed. If not, I'll stay home and pray. I don't have to compromise and I will not vote for presidential candidates who stray so far from the intent of our founders.

Kevin gets a Big "AMEN"
You are absolutely right.

We become enablers by sitting on our hands.

There are sins of commission and sins of OMISSION.

We enable the proliferation of abortion and the decadent sexual lifestyles to flourish by not exercising our God given right to advance his kingdom.

We can perform our christian duty by voting for or against, but to not vote or waste a vote on a 3rd party candidate is sinful or ignorant. God will forgive ignorance, but we are on shaky ground if we knowingly allow a candidate to be elected that will not advance Godly principles.

I admire your courage in speaking this truth.
So many think it, but are afraid to express it.


Danny
A) Voting for a 3rd party or even writing your vote in is NOT a waste - who says Republicans and Democrats are the ONLY ones who can get elected? Last time I checked, it was the PEOPLE who decide that - not these 2 big parties who want us all to THINK they are the only "real" choice.

B) In furtherance of my above belief, I would state to you that if you truly want to do your "christian duty" and do not want to "allow a candidate to be elected that will not advance Godly principles" then you do NOT need to be voting for McCain, you would need to be voting for the Constitution Party - they are the ONLY party around which truly puts God first. Check out their platform and especially the mission statement here

http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php

Limited Choices
Craig & Susan you make good points and I respect your decision to vote your conscience.

I believe that we are stuck with the two-party system for the foreseeable future. It will take more than a 3rd party's platform to sway enough people to abandon the Democratic or Republican party.

If I were to vote for the best candidate, I would do a write-in. But, my write-in candidate will not win and I will have enabled someone I fear becoming president. We can talk degrees of approval or lack thereof. You can make it as finite as you want, but there is no way you can lump the three frontrunners as being totally the same. That is irresponsible.

One of these 3 will be our next president -

Sen McCain
Sen Clinton
Sen Obama

That is my finite pecking order of the candidates that are electable.

I do not want to see Sen Obama or Sen Clinton as president. How can I best prevent that from happening?

Danny re 10:11
And all three are equally unexceptable! You want a cogent reasoning on this see my above posts or click on the underlined name and read my blog on it.

And I don't regard them as "the same" in equal evil. I regard McAint's as the GREATER evil.
Think on THAT one.

It is perfectly acceptable for Christians to "refuse to lay hands on anyone too quickly."

It is a vein of Christian Tradition of long standing to separate from the World.

It MAY be the Duty of Christians to start plotting REVOLUTION!!

Your threesome is simply a false Tri-lemma rather than a dilemma--false is false--Christian obedience may take many forms here and I strongly suggest you check out my reasoning as to why Mac the Knife is a WORSE choice for the Republic and therefore a WORSE choice for Christians.

the big mick
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone: