Have we become the Party of the Lesser of Two Evils? [View All]

How often have you heard: We have to hold our noses and vote for the 'lesser of two evils'? This phrase always seems to be preceded by the qualifier 'we have to'.

Could someone please tell me why it is that we HAVE TO vote for the lesser of evils? Who said so? Who made this rule? Was it made by Democrats who saw their party was becoming so much like the other side that they had to find a reason to vote at all?

That's quite a drop in stature: from the party of the people to the party of the lesser of two evils. One would think that voting for Democrats over Republicans would be an honor and a no-brainer. After all...the Democratic party is superior in many ways. Isn't it? A quick answer to that question is...maybe. But could there be a gap between the party we think we have and the party that exists in reality?

Democratic (DNC) campaign literature touts:

"The 2004 Democratic Party Platform: Stronger at Home, Respected in the World"

This is what the Democratic party 'promised' if elected in 2004. But hidden behind this rhetoric are the ugly facts that the Democratic party voted WITH Republicans to make us 'weaker at home' and 'disrespected in the world'.

It's a shallow campaign slogan to suggest that Democrats would have made us 'stronger at home' when they voted with Bush to gut our treasury and give corporate welfare tax cuts to the rich. How does it make us stronger when they stood by and watched as his environmental policies made it possible for industry to plunder our natural resources and pollute our air and water? How does a rubber stamp congress make us stronger at home? How does ignoring election fraud make us stronger at home?

Democrats voted with Bush to invade and occupy Iraq. In other words...Democrats must share the blame for the World's hatred towards America for their participation in an illegal, aggressive war. Democrats have turned a blind eye to illegal detention, torture and the slaughter of thousands of innocents. As it turns out...their 2004 slogan "Stronger at home, respected in the world' was a fabrication when it's taken into consideration that they voted for, supported or didn't fight against these policies.

The Democratic party:

"The Democratic Party has a long and proud history of representing and protecting the interests of working Americans and guaranteeing personal liberties for all."

The Democratic party may have a history of 'representing and protecting the interests of working Americans'...but they threw off this cause in the 90s with NAFTA, WTO, abandoning unions and worker's rights. And how can they say they're the party that 'guarantees personal liberties for all' when Democrats voted with Bush to weaken the Bill of Rights and destroy civil liberties by helping to make the USA Patriotic Act law? And now they're thinking about 'guaranteeing the personal liberties' of women and other Americans by abandoning 'choice' and the separation of church and state.

Democrats that have cooperated with and enabled Bush's policies to become reality seem to think that they should share none of the blame because Republicans control all branches of government. But they are ON RECORD as having supported many of these horrendous policies. That makes them less than the lesser of two evils.

If the Democratic party expects to EVER win another election...their rhetoric must match their actions. What they say and what they do must become one in the same. It's getting more difficult to vote for the lesser of two evils when the parties are moving closer together in ways that makes them indistinguishable on many issues. Democrats must become the party of truth and responsibility or risk becoming irrelevant and fading into the shadows of history.