Of Voting By Conscience Or In Casting a Protest Vote For a Third Party Candidate

I start off by saying that I am not a big McCain supporter. I do like Mrs. Palin!

Remember when those who felt that George H.W. Bush ran a lackluster campaign and many felt that he was not worth voting for? Those who refused to vote for the Republican Party ticket cast their vote for the third party candidate; He was the Independent Party presidential nominee, Ross Perot. Ross Perot had more of a grass roots support base than do Barr, Baldwin, Keys or Paul enjoy now. What happened in 1992? Perot supporters helped place Bill Clinton into the White House by voting Perot, and we are poised to see history repeat.

I wept the night Clinton was elected. Bill Clinton was suffering from numerous scandal allegations and he still was elected! How could that have been possible? We knew Clinton was corrupt before he was elected, just as we know there’s something fishy about Obama, who has not yet been elected. Ross Perot was responsible for splitting the vote.

Remember on July 16 when Perot unexpectedly dropped out of the presidential race? What did that get us? The Perotbots still voted Perot! Because of that scenario, we, as a nation, endured through eight years of Clinton scandal and corruption. Today we are seeing the results of Clinton administration policies because of legislation that was signed into law by him on November 12, 1999. Let me be fair. Republicans are to blame for some of that legislation signed by Clinton. But, Clinton signed it. Those events in 1999 led to the Wall Street debacle we see today.

It is those who voted for Clinton by voting for Perot that we are still paying the price. All so Perot supporters could make their point. A nice point they made too. I digress.

Today we stand at a precipice in American history. We stand to elect a man who makes Bill Clinton, look like, well, Bill Clinton lite. Obama is a socialist whose allegiance to America is suspect. We really don’t know who Obama in allegiance to. But, it is not the American worker and taxpayer. We know Obama promises to raise taxes on the rich and corporations. By definition, my wife and I are close to meeting the definition of what 'rich' is. We run a small incorporated business and we live in California where the cost of living is high and so are the salaries. It’s all relative.

Anyone knows that those who live in parts of California, New York and other overpriced areas in America may meet Obama's definition of 'rich', but being defined as rich and actually being rich are two different things, especially when one accounts for where in the country a person lives. C'mon folks, a family who makes 100k a year in Kentucky is quite well off. A person who makes 100k in San Francisco or New York is barely making it. Over simplified? Maybe... Some of you smarter folks know of what I speak.

My wife and I struggle just like the family who lives in rural America. Let me ask you; how many political candidates break campaign promises? It happens all the time. If elected, what's to prevent Obama from adjusting his definition of 'rich' down a few notches? What if Obama decides to push for a tax increase on those who have an income of 150k, or maybe 100k? McCain says he won't raise taxes and that he may cut them. That’s change I can hope in, as the alternative of Obama will mean economic death for millions of Americans.

If Obama gets into office, mine and the taxes of millions will be increased. My company will be taxed and regulated into bankruptcy, and I risk losing all I have worked for. Some of you Obama supporters and those of you who relish in participating in class envy, a socialistic concept, are simply orgasmic at the prospect of punishing the 'rich' as defined by Obama's taxation proposals. You haven't the foggiest idea that it is people like me who employ 80% of the people in this country. If my American contemporaries and I go out of business because of Obama's tax proposals, a lot of people lower down the economic ladder are also going to suffer because of higher taxes on individuals and companies. They will be out of a job. This is trickle-down economics in reverse. It is kind of like the laws of physics that says that excrement flows downhill. Take from those who Obama will define as being ‘rich’, and the little guy employed by Obama’s ‘rich’ and their small corporations will get dumped on by that downhill flowing economic excrement.

Back to my original point; On November 4th, who you vote for may be a matter of principle to some of you. Remember this... When the dust settles on November 5th, and if we find that Obama wins because of a repeat of the 1992 election, there will be many Americans who will suffer severe economic harm as soon as Obama’s proposed tax policies are rammed through congress. All this, because of a vote on principle or a vote of conscience.

One last reminder; in the 1992 election, Perot received 18.9% of the popular vote - approximately 19,741,065 votes. This made Perot the most successful third-party presidential candidate in terms of the popular vote. Barr, Baldwin, Paul and Keyes don't hold a candle to the support Perot had. Translate the 1992 scenario to today, and those of you voting your conscience, be it a protest vote, or a vote against both Obama and McCain, you may be responsible for placing Obama in office. Not only will you help Obama realize his dream of socializing this nation, you will assist Obama in breaking the American dream, by stealing it from hard working, honest, business people like me.

Those of you considering voting third party, or planning a write in vote. Don't do it. Your good intentions may be responsible for destroying other American lives. I beg you to reconsider.