Rock the Boat, Baby

Monday, September 27 2004 -- Filed under: — Carmon @ 10:51 pm

I’m sure Donna will remember this song. It seems to be the theme song of the Republican cheerleaders as we get closer to election day. While there are some local candidates in the GOP whom we can support with a clear conscience, the state and the local party have played the shell game too often for us to continue giving our support. It’s a clear case of fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Our love affair with the GOP is over…we’re gonna rock the boat.

Our family does not take this drastic step lightly. We’re just tired of being used. We were faithful to the party: walking precincts with babies in tow, sporting bumper stickers on our cars, holding political meetings in our home, writing big checks to our candidates, stuffing envelopes, writing letters, encouraging our sons to staff phone banks and booths at the fair, helping Pieter start and run a Young Republicans club in our county, getting pelted with vegetables in Sodom by the Bay when we went to a fundraiser for Bush Sr. My muffin mixes still serve at the Republican Women’s Club luncheons every month. We were part of the religious right whose votes are coveted every election cycle. We were part of that demographic group that P.T. Barnum wryly noted as being born every minute. We actually believed the promises that were never fulfilled—you know, about the return of “limited government”—and we were grateful for the few crumbs that were thrown to us. If we didn’t get a seat at the table, at least we got to crouch underneath it so we could fight for those crumbs.

We’re getting too old to go crawling around under tables. We’re getting more crotchety, too. We don’t just want a place at the table anymore; we want to have a say in who’s invited to the party. There are a lot of folks who have crashed the party who just don’t belong there. The big tent is getting so large, it’s hard to keep up with the housekeeping, and it’s threatening to become drafty, too.

Let me tell you a little story. It was not long ago that all the Friedrichs still gave our time, energy and affection to the Republicans. In our state, it was time for the primary elections to elect a candidate to represent our party in the gubernatorial race. Three main contenders emerged to run for this coveted position. One had been mayor of Los Angeles and was touting his experience in that executive position, but he was an unabashed liberal. One had been Secretary of State and a state legislator and was touting his experience in both the executive and legislative arenas, but he was a compromising moderate. The third candidate, Bill Simon, had never held public office (except as an assistant District Attorney in New York City) and he was touting his experience as a businessman saying that he would treat the state government, which was running huge budget deficits because of Gray Davis’s ineptitude, as a business and whip it into shape. He talked like a true blue conservative, even about prolife issues. Thus, like in Goldilocks and the Three Bears, one was too hot, one was too cold and one was just right.

You can imagine how the media, and even many Republicans, painted Mr. Simon. They put a big red “E” in the middle of his forehead: EXTREMIST. The primaries drew closer and it became a race between the liberal ex-mayor and Mr. Simon, whom we adopted as our candidate. Pieter got a chance to spend several hours riding around with him when he came to our county. Our boys helped at his fundraisers and he came to know them by name. Everyone thought that in California, there was no way a man who stood for conservative principles was electable, even in the Republican primary. But on election day, Simon won, and he won by quite a lot. He did not win the general election, however, as Gray Davis’s slime machine was on full force, and he fought dirty and won by a slim margin.

Everyone knows what happened then: Davis was recalled within a year because of his gross mismanagement of the state government (and the diligent efforts of some of our conservative friends). Then another hotly-contested race for governor took place. Again, the Republicans fielded two candidates who represented diverse views: Tom McClintock, a staunch conservative, and that guy with the big muscles. We stood behind McClintock and we rejoiced when he wiped up the floor at the well-publicized debate. But the muscle-man had big name recognition, even though McClintock had been faithfully serving the state for over twenty years and proven his mettle as a man of principle and integrity. The poll numbers were all over the place depending on which poll. Then the endorsements started coming in. One by one, the most conservative players in the state government, people who claimed to be prolife and who courted the evangelical voters, gave their support to the guy who proudly proclaimed that he was for a woman’s right to choose to kill her baby. The reason? He’s more electable. The clincher was when Bill Simon, who knew what it was like to be the underdog and come from behind because of sticking to his principles, gave his endorsement to Arnold.

Pragmatism over principle. It’s not a pretty sight. We had an 18-year-old son who was very disillusioned over Simon’s Benedict Arnold switch. We teach our children that principles are convictions that we operate by in our daily lives, convictions we have adopted because we believe that they are derived from clear biblical injunctions in various areas. Principles are not to be compromised when the going gets tough. If we change those convictions in midstream, then we are being doubleminded. When the going gets tough, we are to get on our knees and plead with the one who directs the heart of the king. If we stick to our principles but lose an election to a Democrat, there is no reason to be fearful. God will honor our faithfulness to biblical principles, even in the midst of wicked leaders. The outcome is up to Him, our job is to obey.

I’ve heard some silly arguments that my way of thinking is naïve, that in the world of politics you have to compromise in order to make gains. Folks, I’ve been watching and waiting a long time to see some of those gains. They just aren’t happening. In my Bible it doesn’t say anything about operating by a different set of rules in the so-called political realm. God’s in charge everywhere. I don’t think I’m the one being naïve.

I do not worry about who will win the election. Whoever God elects will be the winner. I do worry about the number of Christians I see who are ignoring some very disturbing trends in the Republican party and among so-called conservative leaders. If you watch the debate this week between Bush and Kerry, ask yourself two questions whenever you hear President Bush talk about what he will do when he is reelected: is that a biblical function of the civil magistrate and is it constitutional? If the answer to either of those questions is “no,” then pray about whether you should be supporting one who stands against what we ought to be standing for.

I know I’ve been too long-winded on this topic, but I hope you will spend some time in the next few days reading these three articles which have lots of wisdom to contribute about these issues:

R.C. Sproul, Jr. makes a very relevant connection between the current political situation and the story of the spineless spies who were afraid of giants when they should have been fearing God.

Dave Black evaluates the two-party system and finds that it comes up short. Am I the only one who finds it odd that Zell Miller, a Democrat, is given a primetime slot at the RNC when the prolife conservatives were given the boot? It’s not so much that Miller is disaffected by his party, but the two parties are looking more and more alike. Bush has appointed more open homosexuals to key positions in his administration than Bill Clinton!

Dean May muses over what it should look like when we are keeping the first commandment. He says, “Throughout scripture the state god has always been the rival of Yahweh. Why should we think we are immune today? Go online and look at the text of John Kerry’s or George Bush’s acceptance speeches. Look at how much they are promising to get the state god to do for us, things we should be looking to Yahweh to provide.”

I’m tired of being taken for a ride…let’s rock the boat.

16 Responses to “Rock the Boat, Baby”

  1. Laura in Greensboro Says:

    We’re doing it here! It was a shock to come back after being gone from the States for a while and see the worship of Bush and the Republican party. Lord, help us to think Biblically!

  2. Marysue (Maisy) Says:

    Tomorrow, in most areas, PBS is going to be airing a program entitled "Crashing the Parties 2004".

    Similar idea, but just a different perspective. ;)

    We’ll get a look at the third-parties in this show. Behind the scenes stuff, they say.

    Crashing the Parties 2004 debut This is the article on Peroutka’s site.

    PBS.org Crashing the Parties 2004 Read what PBS says about the show, and look up the show time in your area.
    ——-

    We are supporting Peroutka, but not sure if we will vote at all. Disenfranchised by our own state, most anyone can’t even get on the ballot, lest they are a Dem or a Republican party card holder.

    The ballot SHOULD be where we put down our CHOICE for various offices, but if one stands aside and looks objectively at the whole enchilada, one will see we are limited by the ballot, THEY tell us whom we may choose from.

    I’d like a reversal. Limited Government and Open Ballot. :)

    We were fervent Republicans short of activism, but active in talk and communication and debate and arguement with other folks. Fervent debate watchers on TV, Talking heads about Politics were our delight. Limited government? The 1990’s congressional stuff had us delirious. We could smell it.

    Ah, but now, to step outside the bounds of that political ring and watch the circus, it’s amazing to think that what I wanted all along was different from what THEY wanted and what they still want. Limited Goverment, to them, is a catch-phrase, to catch the so-called conservative voter.

    What I want is a return to the Constitution, let’s re-do, start over, dismantle the garbage, and learn from history. But we are few and far between whom believe such.

    In any case, we might not vote due to we aren’t even sure if we can write-in Peroutka on our ballot. But also, we don’t know if they’ll even count the vote if we can write-in Pertoutka on the ballot.

    See, we want to vote to Honor God and the objective is that, voting for an honorable man in God’s Eyes.

    So the opposite vote is what we want. To honor God is to say "NO" to Bush and "NO" to Kerry and "NO" to all third-party candidates except for "Peroutka".

    A God Honoring Vote would be one that is FOR RIGHT. So by being sure your NO vote is placed is our only reason to vote, otherwise staying home is still FOR RIGHT, if there is no option to vote against what’s on the ballot.

    Ah, I’m frustrated, and hope that comes out right.

    :)

  3. Deborah Says:

    You referenced some great articles. Thank you.

  4. Laura N Says:

    I can’t get the R.C. Sproul link to work!

  5. Valerie (Kyriosity) Says:

    I remember that song…and I’m not nearly as old as Donna. (Ducking before I get pelted with vegetables!)

  6. Meredith Says:

    Back in 2000 we changed our satellite package so we could get Fox News in time for the election. We loved watching Brit Hume every night. I am the one who has become disillusioned the past couple years. In the aftermath of 9/11 I was proud of my President and the way he presented himself. I praised God that Al Gore had not won the election. Actually I still think it’s right and good to do so. However, on the domestic side of things, I kept waiting for those big tax cuts. Instead we got a reduction in the rate that would expire in ten years. John Linder, one of my state’s reps, has had a bill abolishing the IRS and implementing a consumption tax on the table for several years. Why isn’t the President supporting it? Yes, we got the partial birth abortion ban signed into law. But then the courts strike it down and the President doesn’t fight for his nominees to those courts even when the Democrats unconstitutionally filibuster those nominees. Then we hear in a State of the Union address that the President wants to give billions of dollars to Africa to fight AIDS. Since when is that a responsibility of the federal government. There is at least one country in Africa who is successfully fighting its AIDS problem itself - with an abstinence argument. And THEN we have this huge prescription drug bill that our supposedly conservative President signs into law. You know I used to believe in the strategy that you give your opponent a little bit of what he wants and then he’ll leave you alone. Uhh, that hasn’t worked and I’ve realized that that strategy is unprincipled.

    Then I start reading about Peroutka and get real excited. The problem is that my husband is still backing Bush and it’s hard to talk to him about it because I haven’t fully formed my arguments yet.

    Carmon, a couple weeks ago you said that you don’t think a wife should vote contrary to her husband. I thought about that and I think I agree. I brought the issue up with my husband and told him that I wasn’t going to vote for Bush and if he did I wouldn’t vote for anyone. He was taken aback by this and we have yet to talk about it again. I mean to give him some articles and websites to read about why I don’t think we should vote for Bush but I sure could use some wisdom from you and others about what I should do.

    Thanks

  7. Pieter Friedrich Says:

    Laura, I just tried the RC link again, and it works from this end. It takes you to his squib "Spies Like Us."

  8. Nickey Says:

    Does anyone know if the partial birth abortion ban would have really done anything anyway? As far as I understood it you could still get one for "health" reasons, which as defined by Doe v Bolton is so broad it could be for practically any reason as long as a doctor agreed to it.

  9. Donna Boucher Says:

    That song happened to be popular when I WAS a cheerleader way back in the 70’s. Back in the days when we prayed before games and wore only skirts and dresses to school :o)
    (Our skirts were too short…but our tummys never showed)

    It’s not so bad being the old one. I kinda like it :o)
    Donna

    Now, I will put on my thinking cap and read the rest of your post, Carmon!

  10. Anonymous : Chicken Little Says:

    If voting for the lesser of 2 evils is wrong, is it also wrong to vote for the lesser of 3 evils?

    Otherwise, I agree wholeheartedly with you post.

  11. Donna Boucher Says:

    Did you feel the earthquake?

    I hope you are all safe and sound.

    Donna

  12. Pieter Friedrich Says:

    Considering the earthquake struck a town 300 miles away from us, we probably didn’t feel the quake much more than you did, Donna. ;)

  13. Carmon Says:

    Now, Pieter, she was concerned for us, and back east they aren’t used to the states being quite so large! We didn’t feel it but our friends in the Bay Area got a little shaking. We have been in a very large earthquake, but that will be a story for another time ;-).

  14. Marysue (Maisy) Says:

    If voting is: To vote for the lesser of anything, then it seem that most folks choose to pick the "lesser of two so-called Christians"

    To choose whom to vote for is usually pragmatically considered, that’s the Two Evil’s approach.

    Third-party voters don’t vote pragmatically, necessarily. The motivation for many is Principled, with mine being "What would Honor God in the Nov. election?"

  15. Kelly M. Says:

    *Incredibly cynical comment*

    We could all just vote for the lesser of two weevils, a la ‘Master and Commander’ and most likely make the same amount of difference!

  16. Cheryl from Wilton Says:

    Once again, Carmon, you and I seem to be on the same page!! We’re rockin’ the boat down here in Wilton, with Peroutka yard signs along the road and all!


Original site by Hans Friedrich  -- (Valid XHTML)