I’ve been taking a lot of flack from self-defined “one-issue” voters lately. What’s annoying is that these are really not one-issue people at all, but they think they are. They (most of them) think “conservative” is an issue and the Tea Party defines “conservative.”
I refuse to vote the self-identified “conservative” candidate in the Virginia gubernatorial race. Because every gun-rights group in the Commonwealth has endorsed him, I’ve been called stupid, a traitor, a “liberal” (as a pejorative, of course), misguided, and other terms.
What many of these people – people who have known me for years – fail to realize is that gun-rights is simply the barrier to entry. After that, you other positions come in to play. If you don’t support my gun rights, I don’t recognize your “right” to my vote, pure and simple. That lets out Terry McAuliffe, though I have a strong handful of other reasons. My only other absolute barrier is a conviction that the Tennessee constitution got it part right (“Whereas Ministers of the Gospel are by their profession, dedicated to God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions; therefore, no Minister of the Gospel, or priest of any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to a seat in either House of the Legislature.”) and I’d carry that to “any elected office”. Those are the barriers to my vote.
After the barriers comes the curtain – the other civil rights. Candidates can pass the curtain if I disagree with them on these issues, but only if they have very very strong credentials and a record of respecting others’ beliefs and practices. Among these are the right to marry the person I choose; the right to confer with my doctor and elect those medical procedures best for me; the right to speak my mind even if that speech might offend your god; the right to be treated equally under the law; and the right to insist that your religious preference not affect mine. In other words, believe what you want, but don’t restrict others. After that, I assess life experiences and personal characteristics. And I consider whether my votes can help keep the government split. That is, all else considered, let’s assure that no one party controls the Governor’s mansion and both houses of the legislature.
It’s that latter set of criteria that many of my gun-rights acquaintances don’t understand. I believe that in their minds, those rights are inextricably linked, and individuals can have differing opinions on each and every one of them. It’s a matter of prioritization, and deciding which have to be met and which can be squishy. In my mind, the gun-rights question must be met, and a combination of the others must be met. Cuccinelli can’t meet any of them.
Both barriers are in place for LG. That’s a shame, because the LG is an important person in Virginia, with tie-breaking authority in our evenly divided State Senate. “None of the Above” as a write-in is the only option. I feel this is a cop-out, but it is the only way an American has to show that no candidate is acceptable. We are literally prevented by election law from expressing our opinions. Even a “none of the above” is seen only in the category of “write-ins” – also-rans – unless there are enough of them the same. If all voters would write in, maybe the message would be carried, but there are just too many who are happy to select all the people with the same letter after their names, no matter their qualifications.
I am still seeking the election that has a slate of candidates without barriers.
AMCIT's Weblog 