Many times people running for an elected office will recite various quotes from US Presidents, they are using these quotes to make others believe they are correct. And many times those seeking public approval are the very members of either Democrat or Republican Party preying on those weaker individuals who listen in awe, without applying critical thinking or really looking beyond what they see and hear at that given moment.
Often times people quote George Washington to suggest that they are correct. And many have quoted Abraham Linclon as well to suggest they are correctly applying what is best for this nation.
Yet, it was obvious the real issue was being ignored, otherwise they would not be so fast to endorse someone who is either a Republican or Democrat. It could even be argued they would not be registered to vote under either party.
When you go to register to vote as another party besides Democrat or Republican, or, when changing your party association from Democrat or Republican to another association, listen carefully to what is spoken to you. I personally heard from State officials "You will not be allowed to vote in the primary" (they did not not know who I was other than a person inquiring about joining another party besides Democrat or Republican.).
The statement made to me should not be permitted, the State should not be permitted to express that comment to anyone who is changing their choices in party association. It is a deceptive statement that can be taken the wrong way by the voter of an "alternate party". It can also be taken as an act of intimidation to the voter by the State. Though the State may argue they are educating the voter- (the voter is giving up a right to vote in a primary election). Unless the State fully informs or educates the voter during that conversation, and the State is fully aware the voter they are speaking to knows and understands the difference in a "Primary Election" and a General Election", and the voter understands their choice has no bearing on voting in a general election for any candidate of their choice, before the State begins making that statement, they are knowingly creating a danger not only to the voters but the party that voter wishes to be associated with other than the Democrat or Republican Party.
This is a diversionary tactic: A threat to the voter, to pressure them from joining any other party besides those which hold Primary Elections, to ones that are only permitted by the State to hold conventions, which the voter may understand as they will not be allowed to vote at all.This is especially the case if they are registering to vote for a party that is not on that States list of party's who are qualified to have a candidate on the ballots, under the rules imposed by that States rulling factions, who also control the law making process; who are responsible for causing so many ill feelings and the lack of voter confidence in their government, who are deciding to quietly seek alternate choices, but afraid of being labled publicly by the State, and having their right of privacy infringed upon by the very system they believe has divorced them and destroyed their trust.
When you have fear of your government, the government (actually the party associations controling government,) has control of you. And many people are afraid of their government (again; afraid of the combined factions controlling government), they are too afraid to make any open statements they disagree at the risk of false imprisonment, persecution, and even loosing their jobs, unless they know they have a lot of people to associate with, most will say they are non political or Independent.
Courage, like cowardace, has more room to successfully function when there are more people to hide behind. Any faction which holds power, also holds knowledge of this fact. They also use their power, with that knowledge to their advantage- to remain in power.
What harm is their in being a part of a faction or an association? Can't one or two people play a role in keeping that group from becoming corrupt?
According to the history of mankind, the answer continuously has been absolutely not.
When George Washington was giving his farewell address he brought out several topics that needed to be addressed. Not soley to that generation, but to future generations as well.
"...combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
Mr Washington described what threats lurk in party associations to liberty. Though he understood how vital a union was, he also recognized how the dangers a union or a couple strong unions were inside of a union, and the needs of preventing another war, one which he actively participated in, and witnessed so many men and women die while he commanded the Continental Army.
What is the definiton of this "liberty" Mr Washington Spoke of ?
"Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property. " -George Washingtons Farewell adress
Clearly the liberty that was being spoken of by Mr. Washington was already at risk with an association of two controlling organizations or unions in place in the very government he was Presiding over in the White House.
It is often heard, people will address any other party other than the Democrat or Republican Party as a "third party". Yet, In Delaware, there are over 25 registered political party's you can register to vote under. however, in 2012 only four of those associations are able to have their candidates placed on the election ballots, for voters to choose from, unless a person seeking to be elected obtains the State required number of signatures to be placed on the ballot as a candidate for an elected office.
What happens if a person who belongs to an unqulified party that has only a hand full of registered voters in the State, but are capable of being placed on the ballots because of having enough signatures? Are they now the "Third Party"? or are one of the other two party's besides Democrat and Republican the third party? Who is third, fourth, sixth? or twenty-sixth? And what does it really matter? And what happens a Democrat Changes to a Republican or vise versa. Are they still any different? or the same? and why is there a law to restrict what party's can be on the ballots but there is no law that restricts a person from changing party affilitaion and then being able to run on that party's ballot?
Both are equally wrong!
I have never really dedicated myself to a party. And though I am the state chairman for a political party. I still reserve myself from becoming too influenced by any one party, including the one I belong to. The reason for my reservation is based upon what risks George Washington percieved would occur, that would eventually destroy the preservation of the rights of person (life, and ethically responsible for ones own actions) and the ownership of property.