Utterly Meaningless

Democrat? That is sarcasm, right?

I can’t bring myself to vote Democrat, but I may vote Libertarian or not vote at all, and hope Bush loses.

I am with Roy on this one unless Lieberman gets the nomination, in which case I would have to look at his positions closer. I don’t understand Bush’s conviction that all problems should be “solved” by the government.

In order to be the lesser of two evils, it is important to be … less evil. It is a great disappointment that, despite all of this, Bush is still the lesser evil (to me, anyway). As offended as I am at nearly everything Bush does, the viable alternatives are worse.

That Bush is the candidate of the “party of smaller government” makes me realize how far out on the political fringe I am.

You all are missing the point. I’m libertarian (small “L” through and through). I agree with very little the Dems say they’ll do. But, if one of them wins they’ll be able to do nothing, since the GOP is sure to remain in control of both houses. If Bush wins we get more of “compassionate conservatism” and huge new entitlements. Which is really the lesser of two evils, Bush or gridlock? I’ll take gridlock.

Uh…conservatives hav spent dacades telling peole that the is no free lunch and trying to hold back social spending to no avail.

Sometimes the best way to show people th error of their ways is to give them what they demand…more spending. Bush has set us on the course to out of control spending that will finally (!) get the American people to have to pick and choose what the true function of government should be and what shall all citizen be required to pay for other citizens.

The only way to do this is the break the bank.

Thanks Dubya, you finally decided to rub the liberal social spenders and income thieves noses in their demands.

Been hittin’ the Kool-Aid again, Miller?

Actually, I think he’s not too far off the mark. Democrats have cried for “free” prescriptions for seniors for years now. How did they intend for us to pay for it? I figure it will be shot down or at least neutered and either result will be used against the Democrats in the campaigns as necessary to win senior votes.

[I had here a list of achivements of the Clinton administration with a Repuiblican congress, spanning terrorism, military action, FBI actions, courts, and guns. I think, however, that you could provide your own list which would be more meaningful to you. (Head Start comes to mind.) In any case, my main point is …]

While it is certainly true that a divided government would prevent the president from getting all of his legislative goals through, it is not the case that such a president could not do great harm. If we were in a (constitutional) world where the president’s power independent of the congress was small, then I would agree; gridlock could be the best solution. We do not live in that world.