I almost always do vote Libertarian and as such I also defend the right
of _every_ citizen rich or poor to spend their money as they wish so
long as: a) It is _their_ money and b) They are not doing something
fraudulent, forceful, or threatening with it. You can't just espouse
Libertarian principle for everyone except the rich and remain
The idea that the rich are the primary instrument of government
corruption is laughable in any case. Politicians do what they have to in
order to remain in office. The biggest 'bribes' they accept are the
votes of the Mooching Sheeple who all want Something For Nothing. Every
year billions of public monies are given to people standing in line for
"their" handouts. The suburban housewife who demands a new soccer field,
the parent who feeds their child tons of fast food and then wants
government interdiction because the kid is fat, the farmer who can't
remain competitive and wants subsidies, and the steel worker who thinks
they are entitled to be insulated from the realities of the global
market - _these_ are the people who corrupt government. About 1/2 of the
Federal US budget is now handouts of one sort or another. This will
likely grow considerably now that the elderly and almost elderly have
voted themselves the "right" to "free" drugs on the backs of their
children and grandchildren.
Vote Libertarian indeed. But know that the enemny of freedom is not
primarily he rich man, it is your mooching neighbor next door who wants
to live life irresponsibly and then have you pay for the damages.
Tim Daneliuk email@example.com
In theory this may be true. In reality what actually happens is,
the price of air time (radio/tv), an often complex issue is pared
down to a 30 to 60 second media spot with 3 of the last seconds
used to identify who is paying for the spot. The latter more often
than not tells you nothing about who is sponsoring the ad since
they're typically "concerned citizens of (fill in the city. county,
state)" or "citizens against unfair taxes", "citizens for education",
etc.. AND - these "information ads" are often attack ads that come
out a day or two before the election, giving "the fourht estate"
no time to investigate and present the bigger picture.
Campaign finance reform is easy - if you can't vote for them you
can't give them money - period - no infommercials, no information
ads, no full page ads in the paper with no names. If you can't
vote for the candidate you can't give them anything - period.
No corporate donations, no PAC money, no Tribal Council, no
labor union, ... AND - you can't give a candidate more than
$1,000 without making the donation public. If you feel strongly
about a candidate or an issue you should be willing to say
so up front - "I, John Jay Faddingle Heimer Schmidt support this
candidte or issue and am putting my time, money and name out
there for all to see. My reputation as a citizen and a member
of this community speaks for itself."
And while we're at it, let's try and get the "public airways" back
so air time can be devoted to candidates and concerned citizens
presenting information and positions. FCC, where are you?
AND, wouldn't it be nice if "the news" went back to being actual
nws and analysis rather than shouting matches, sensationalism and
flat out ads for major corporations and power brokers? News is
not "entertainment" but is supposed to be information.
BTW - if you have to keep saying "fair and balanced" I begin
to doubt that what comes next is fair or balanced - or even
true. But I'll leave the consolidation of the media for
He/she who dies with the most toys missed the point
You don't think billion dollar election cycles (the rate in 2000) are actually
limiting the ability of normal people to have their voices heard?
How will the pittance any of us could come up with be heard over the roar of a
PAC that is throwing a few million dollars in untraceable funds at the
Elections cost too much money and that assures that the rich are the only ones
who have their voices heard.
Oh Pluuuuueeeze. The "normal people" are a bunch of mooching slugs who
get the government to handout billions every year in "free" benefits.
They cost this country not only money but its very liberty. Witness,
for example, the recent elderly coup which gives them "free"
drugs at the expense of their children and grandchildren. Money
is property. Taking it by the force of taxation and giving
it to another citizen (instead of only taking what is needed to
keep us all _free_) is _theft_, nothing more, and the Sheeple
do it on a WAY larger scale than any rich person could hope to.
The "normal" people _do_ have their "voices heard" in the form of
iniquitous amounts of goverment-sponsored grift and outright theft.
Over half the Federal budget is entitlement programs (the very name
turns my stomach) and that number will likely grow.
The worst corporate financial abuse, the most overt paying-for-votes
scheme, do not begin to compare to the screwing of the American liberty
and treasury indulged by our fellow citizens.
Tim Daneliuk firstname.lastname@example.org
Riiight. And that's why a guy like George Soros can pledge millions
of his own money even AFTER this so-called "reform" has passed. Yeah,
the law sure took care of that. (sarcasm off).
What this has really done has insured that elections will held to the
2 party system, unless another guy like Ross Perot comes around with
his own millions.
Honestly, when did politians last pass a law which LIMITED their own
power? This thing passed with bipartisan support because it benefits
both major parties by limiting the dollars that the 3rd parties will
be able to spend.
You've all been tricked, good and hard.
In fact, I *don't* get the government I deserve. While this is certainly true
of the population _as_a_whole_, it equally certainly is not true of those
individuals such as myself (and yourself, I presume) who take care to vote
whenever possible for candidates who favor limited government -- only to have
our votes negated by those of the vast hordes whose only interest in liberty
is to be free to suck at the public teat.
I wish more people understood that the Second Amendment is truly the
keystone of our system of constitutional government:: the Constitution and
Bill of Rights are nothing more than old pieces of paper, and the rights and
freedoms they guarantee us only so many empty promises, if we the People lack
the means to _compel_ a recalcitrant government to honor those guarantees.
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss
IMHO, the 2nd amendment is the only thing that gives the others any
teeth. As long as the population is willing to be led by the nose or
bought by promises, the government we get will be the one the majority
is willing to accept. Politicians lie, it's what they do. The other
thing they do is consolidate power. Unless there are adverse
consequences for those two behaviors, we will never have a government
that isn't corrupt.
OK, rant mode off, sorry.
Dave in Fairfax
reply-to doesn't work
daveldr at att dot net
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.