On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 06:04, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 13:46:09 +0900, Zach Dennis <zdennis / mktec.com> wrote:
> > Not to start anything, but last I heard Kerry had his hands in many
> > money jars himself. You better vote libertarian and play it safe.
> 
> It might help if (1) Michael Badnarik himself weren't a bit of a
> nutbar, as every libertarian candidate run in the last umpteen years
> has been, and (2) the libertarian party actually had a clue about
> pragmatism as opposed to True Belief.
> 
> Individual, thoughtful, libertarians don't bother me. There are,
> however, too many libertarians that believe that the government can do
> no good at all outside of an extremely narrow focus. They forget that
> the laws that exist do exist because of a reason. Not all of the
> reasons are good, and not all of them are still relevant, but America
> has already lived through an effective Libertarian paradise -- and it
> is from this time that we now have labour unions, OSHA, the EPA, etc.
> 
> I held my nose and voted for Kerry, because Bush has proven to be the
> singular most incompetent full-term president that the US has ever
> had, as well as being a warmonger.

     I've been a registered republican for well over twenty years, but
I'm not going to vote for Bush.  He lied to me.  He spends like a
liberal, and wants to change the constitution based religion and the
politics of the moment.  He's a hot head and he's rash, he rushes in to
things and then flounders wildly.  In short, he's no conservative.

     I've stated elsewhere that I might vote for Kerry, in the hopes
that he will be ineffective (and thus do less harm), but I may well go
for Badnarik instead.  All I know is that another term of GWB will
probably finish the destruction of the republican party that Nixon
started and RR nearly averted.  You can only lie to people so long
before it catches up with you, even during "war time."

       -- Markus