People Are Already Starting To Play the "Lesser Of Evils" Voting Game!

Well here we go again. Same nonsense, different election cycle.

Tea Party activists have already resigned themselves that Mitt Romney will win the Republicrat nomination and of course we all have to vote for him now, because he's "the only one who can beat Obama" ( or at least that's what the big government Republicrat establishment wants us to believe! ), and we all know how important that is, right?

But "lesser of evils" voting is what has led us, over the last 100 years of Progressive "progress" to exactly where we are now, at the brink of the planned collapse and globalization of the United States.

If it happens, it is the Progressive Socialist Globalist movement that will have won, not Frick or Frack ( Romney or Obama ). Because that's exactly what these guys are, folks. It reminds me of the old "Mission Impossible" movies, where a guy would be wearing a latex mask and peel it off, and a completely different guy would be underneath it. Only now, if you peel the latex mask off Mitt Romney, guess who's there? Barack Obama!

And I'm telling you, though I doubt anyone will listen at this point because you're so indoctrinated with age-old statism, if we lose the United States to Globalist Socialism, no human again in history will ever know freedom and individual rights. None. That will be it for individual rights and human freedom forever.

The United States is the last best hope for freedom.

Without the United States, there is no "free world".

So here we were, discussing this in a group, and someone said the following, to which I replied...

> And if you don't vote for either one then what happens?

The same thing that would have happened if we hadn't voted at all. A state-worshipping Progressive Socialist gets elected and the United States keeps heading down the toilet. I'm frankly sick and tired of being made to feel guilty for not voting for Frack when Frick could win. Horrors! They're nearly the same!

"There may not be much difference between Democrats and Republicans anymore." -  Former Senator Tom Daschle ( D - SD )

Mitt "The Chamelion" Romney, who has taken every possible position on every issue, at one time or another:

"We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country." - Mitt Romney as Governor of MA, speaking of RomneyCare and his health care mandate!

"I think the old standby definitions of who votes for which party have been blown away in this campaign. I think people recognize that I'm not a partisan Republican, that I'm someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive." - Mitt Romney campaigning for Governor in 2002! 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMcjJEXt9To

What's a Progressive?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society

http://itmakessenseblog.com/2010/10/11/fabian-socialism-the-cancer-...

George Soros is a Progressive of London School of Economics origins.

"I prefer the word progressive, which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th Century. I consider myself a modern progressive." - Hillary Clinton, July 23, 2007.

"Progressive" just means they're from the Fabian School of Socialism and want to win slowly by attrition, instead of the violent Communist revolutions that Russia, China, North Korea and Cuba went through. So they've been working on it since around the time of Teddy Roosevelt and the formation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.

So excuse me Tea Party compatriots ( or should I say "comrades") , if I'm disgusted because so many of you support people like Romney now, "just because they might be able to beat Obama". If he does, it won't matter, and you will have sold us out.

This is why I think the Tea Party movement has killed itself off and is now as good as dead, along with what we used to know as the free country of the United States of America.