Sit this one out…and you may be sitting a while

Here we go again. Whenever conservatives are disappointed by their politicians, they get overdramatic and threaten to boycott elections.
The same conservatives who flooded Congressional offices with telephone calls urging legislators to vote down the infamous amnesty bill of 2007 are many of the same ones threatening not to vote for president in the 2008 general election just because their candidate(s) will not be on the ballot in November.
These same conservatives who affected change just months ago by petitioning their government for a redress of grievances are now talking about sitting this one out, hoping perhaps something so bad will happen that America will have to learn her lesson and correct her mistakes. They think by allowing America to send herself to hell in a hand basket that she will see the errors of her ways and be able to right her wrongs.
Well, last time I checked, hell is final. I sure hope we don’t have to go there first before we realize what we’ve done, because by then, it may be too late.
I know that many conservatives have gotten upset over John McCain all but securing the republican presidential nomination. He isn’t my first choice. Heck, he isn’t even my second or third, for that matter. But I’m not going to sit out the general election just because I’m disappointed that McCain is going to be the republican nominee and not someone more conservative.
The idea of conservatives not voting in this year’s presidential election out of protest is tantamount to a pouting four-year-old who didn’t get his way. Since when do we start acting like the little brats we spank for throwing temper tantrums? While liberals call people names and throw things when they get upset, we conservatives do no better by running off and pouting in the corner.
But worse than behaving like angry little children is the potential fallout that may result from an election boycott.
The number of people who actually vote on Election Day is hovering a little over half of the total population of eligible American voters. This means that roughly one out of every two voters does not vote. In a nation of about 300 million, there are probably around 200 million or so eligible voters. Only about 100 million actually vote.
This means that only about one-third of the total U.S. population actually votes, another third does not vote, and one-third probably wishes it could.
Question: What incentive does Congress have to NOT amend the U.S. Constitution and do away with national elections entirely? Why should the federal government continue to spend money on something that is of increasing disinterest to the public, regardless of whether or not it is constitutional? Perhaps most concerning to me is whether or not most people would even notice or care if their right to vote was suddenly taken away tomorrow.
If conservatives get angry over such trivial matters as a moderate winning a party nomination, then imagine how they will react if Uncle Sam takes away their national voice entirely. Not likely, you say?
Seven years ago, the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and its residuals like the Patriot Act, a national ID card and deteriorating border security weren’t likely, either. Fifteen years ago, the Brady Bill was not likely. Thirty years ago, the swelling illegal immigration problem was not likely. And 75 years ago, nobody foresaw the federal government growing as large and mostly autonomous as it has become today.
So don’t tell me that losing our right to vote isn’t likely. Our rights have been slowly eroding, piece by piece, with the passage of every bill. Whenever a new act is codified into law, we lose a little bit more freedom. But such losses are so incremental, so small and so seemingly insignificant that they go largely unnoticed by John Q. Public. The more complacent and apathetic we become, the more likely we will lose our right to vote. It may not happen overnight or in one fowl-swoop, but it can happen gradually, a little at a time until all that’s left are the chips and shavings of a once-proud institution. Sadly, when it happens, there will be very few of us left who care. But once it happens, we will wake up too late wondering where our voices went.
There is a time and a place for boycotts and walk-outs. Elections aren’t one of them. Do you really believe the politicians care whether or not we vote? I think they would prefer we didn’t, because not voting would only secure the power they already have.
To all of my fellow conservatives out there, let me paint you a picture of what the day after Election Day will look like if you do sit this one out: Either Hillary of Obama will become president-elect. Assuming the democrats keep both houses of Congress, we will have a democrat triumvirate in power for the first time since the early days of the Clinton Administration. And we all know how well that one went. Worst of all, the socialists in the Democratic Party will finally have a vehicle for advancing their agendas of radical change. This happened twice before in American history: During the FDR and LBJ administrations. Each time, the reach of the federal government was expanded significantly with social reforms, which have done nothing but create an entitlement culture and succeeding generations growing up dependent on government. Do we really want to see more of that? How much more social reform (i.e., domestic spending) can America’s infrastructure take before it collapses under the weight of overburdening laws, regulatory agencies, taxation and gratuitous deficit spending?
Nobody thought that bridge between Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, would or could collapse until it happened. All most of us could do then was watch others clean up the mess.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to be left with only one option where the United States of America is concerned.
McCain or no McCain, I’m voting on Election Day to try to keep the worst from happening.