If Ron Paul Were a T-Bone SteakSubmitted by fanofwalt on Mon, 06/02/2008 - 16:58
Now there's a headline you've probably never seen here before... ;)
Along with my earlier belly laugh in response to the idea of deliberately voting for Obama (a thread which I was in the midst of commenting on when it suddenly went *poof*), I have to acknowledge that there was some merit to that post. (Stay with me, here.)
Lacking the ability to mind-read, I suspect the post was primarily an exercise in brainstorming as to how best harness the power that is arising this election season, not just in the Revolution camp, but with voters overall, and how to leverage results for future elections. That, in and of itself, is creative, outside-the-box thinking, and we would all do well to consider brainstorming, even when it leads to ineffectual solutions, because it forces us to look at things with fresh perspectives (see A Whack On the Side of the Head).
Yet, while there is merit in brainstorming, we must also exercise the ability to discern which solutions serve our needs, and which don't.
If I understood the premise correctly, it may be something like this -- let's pretend meat eaters = Republicans and seafood eaters = Democrats):
- You're at a steak and seafood restaurant with a group of meat-eaters.
- You get to order meals for the entire group.
- Each member of the group wants a really thick, juicy T-bone steak to eat.
- Hm, looks like T-bone is off the menu. Darn.
- The only other meat choice is Grade D meat. You really can't stomach that.
- So you glance over at the seafood selections. Hm, nothing there you or any of your group really wants. The options there are crappie and mackerel, both of which are mercury-laden.
- You heave a sigh. If you order the "Grade D meat", you're sending the message to the chef that this particular selection is A-OK with you and your fellow carnivores. Can't have that.
- By ordering either of the fish options, your group will be enraged and will let the restaurant know that, the next time they come, they ONLY want meat!
The hypothesis proposed in the now extinct thread was akin to this; that the next time the group goes to the restaurant, they will remember how much they despised the fish, and will therefore settle for nothing less than a high quality, grain-fed T-bone steak.
Another (and more likely) probability would be that when the group goes back to the restaurant, they will be so desperate for something that is not seafood, they would happily settle for a dry patty of cheap ground beef, after having to put up with the mercury-laden fish.
Being denied what you really want, receiving a terrible substitute in its place, and then later being offered and accepting something kind of like what you really wanted in the first place but certainly not of the same caliber, is likely to result in worse future offerings, not better.
The chef already knows that you settled for the mercury-laden fish when you really didn't want that in the first place; why should he go to the expense and bother of providing you with grain-fed top quality beef?
Ergo: the vote for Obama (or Hillary) (or McCain) sends the message that we are "happy enough" to settle for less.
And as long as we fail to demand a T-bone, that's just what we'll continue to get.