Reject the regime

People are finally starting to get it... and discuss it in public:

All my life, I've cast votes in presidential elections that were votes against the Democrat rather than for the Republican.

This year, though, I'm close to being done with that compromise. At the risk of scandalizing my high school civics teacher, this might be the first presidential and congressional election I've sat out on principle. As a character in Richard Linklater's film Slacker says, "Withdrawing in disgust is not the same as apathy."

Both parties have run the country into the ground, and I have no faith – none – in the leadership class in Washington. With any luck, the 2010 midterm elections will see true mavericks arise from the grassroots of both parties to challenge the incumbents. This year, though, voting in the presidential and congressional contests only gives voters the chance to affirm Washington's rent-seeking, self-serving status quo.

I applaud Dreher's realization, but it's worth pointing out that "not voting" is not the only option. On my state's ballot alone, there are a dozen names listed for President. Granted, one has to work a little harder to figure out their positions, because the non-Republicrats don't have the national media in their pocket 24/7. But hey, being a citizen takes work.

As for waiting for a "true maverick" to emerge, where was Dreher during the Republican primaries? Say what you will of Ron Paul, but he certainly wasn't trading in the same big-government platitudes that got us where we are now. And given the economic events of the past month, he looks positively prophetic. Oh, that's right -- he doesn't look or speak as if he came from Central Casting, so everyone ignores him. That's the voters' problem, then, not a lack of maverick candidates.

Still, a little realization is better than none, and Dreher's almost there in terms of rejecting the two-party duopoly that has destroyed America. Let's hope millions of others experience the same epiphany in the next three weeks.