« Let's Try Freedom | Main | A Hopefully-Temporary Condition »
October 14, 2004
Systemic Contempt
Note: this is a post recovered from my old blog, before it died of an insufficient backup. Any comments/trackbacks on it have not been brought over, but can be seen with the original. The date is that of the original posting.
\"\;Stephen Green expresses, better than I myself could, why Democrats have lost my vote for anything until they reform themselves. Please read; it's important.
I still think that we'd be better off as a country if we pulled so much power away from the Federal government that national elections went back to being personally meaningless, but I guess I'd settle for us all at least following the general rules.
Facing my first election in Texas it's not hard to avoid voting for a Dem. My problem is it looks like I may wind up voting a straight Republican ticket and I don't like the Reps enough to be happy with that. Know any Libertarians who deserve a vote?
Posted by: Karl Gallagher on October 14, 2004 04:02 PMWhy does no one protest the efforts, mostly "legal" in states where the democrats control the government, to keep Nader off the ballot.
I always thought America was a country where anyone could become president. But if Nader cant even get on the bsllot, then no one can.
I personally hate Nader but I feel the essence of democracy is choice. Anyone who limits our choice for no other reason than to build his own power commits lese majestie and is an enemy of democracy.
This is one more example of how the democratic party is trying to destroy our nation.
Posted by: sol vason on October 15, 2004 02:14 PMKarl, I'm sadly out of touch locally. I need to educate myself fairly quickly though, especially since I'll need to vote early because I'll be out of state on election day.
Sol, I do despise the Democrat efforts to keep Nader off the ballot. I don't want Nader anywhere near the Presidency, but I want that to be fairly done. On the other hand, there will be no fairness in elections until the major parties have the exact same funding rules and ballot access requirements as everyone else.
A good observation, Jeff. Frederic Bastiat said as much: "If the law were restricted to protecting all persons, all liberties, and all properties, is it not clear that those who vote could not inconvenience those who cannot vote?" (from The Law)
Posted by: Francis W. Porretto on October 15, 2004 08:07 PM

