Postcards from the Bleeding Edge: The 97% solution

Sunday, October 31, 2004

The 97% solution

"People don't want war...but [they] can always be brought to do the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." - Hermann Goering, 1946 (German General of Aircraft, morphine addict)

Ever since 9/11, we have been a nation divided by fear. After 9/11, I turned my television off, permanently, and stopped being bombarded by broadcast political rhetoric. Instead, I drove past Mark Bingham's parents' house every day, and reflected, in silence, on what it truly meant to be human.

If it were up to me, I'd have bade that every American on a plane with a cell phone and a sharp object to keep them ready: to defend our rights, and liberty, and freedom; if necessary, to die to preserve those things.

That's this American's response to terrorism. I'm not afraid of Bin Laden - and because I love freedom - I'm willing to read the complete text of what he just said as I know I'd stand my ground, and give my life for freedom, if I had to.

Now: Normally, I'm a green leaning libertarian. I registered democratic last year to vote against (D) Mike Honda in the primary... and I later learnt I was no longer in his district. Gerrymandering in the age of computerisation has reached an obscene low - and that's why I favor proportional voting - not that either party favors it.

Bush is too far right - Kerry too far left... and neither has bothered to have a coherent thought about the three issues I care about most - Asteroid exploration, digital rights and copyright reform.

When I see the national review advocating a single party state, my blood boils. When I see Democrats tearing down the lawn signs of Republicans, my hope for sanity fades.

If I could have one government program funded by either party, it would be to have the Internet's babelfish language translation service extended to translate Hebrew, Arabic, Hindi, Chinese, and American.

The debate thus far has borne no relation to the important issues facing the nation... except Vietnam. It's just two members of the same statist party fighting over whose friends will get favors.

I oppose the tyranny of minority rule by either side. My loyalties are to truth and reason, not emotion. Where passions boil, reason tends to suffer.

So, my vote, this election, is for a representative federal government. Call it a political anti-trust action, because I trust neither party. The prospect of either American party holding all the reins of power frightens me far more than Bin Laden ever could. Both our parties are captured by statists - my position on the negatives of creeping federalism is captured by Eric Raymond's "Why I'm not a left/liberal right/conservative" - and my positions on the positives are largely unprintable in a family weblog.

Ordinarily, I'd just throw up my hands and vote for Badnarik. But:

With the Republicans in control of the House, the Senate split, and Kerry in charge of the executive body, only the policies that both sides can agree on will come forth. With both parties sharing power in the federal government (or, rather, continuing to contend for it), the will of 97% of the voting public will be represented through the next four years (given the present 49%/48% split). If the situation were reversed - with, instead, the Democrats threatening total control of the three parts of elected federal government - I'd vote Republican. That's not the case. That's why I'm voting for Kerry.

If you can not defend a single party state: At least be confident that Kerry can perform the job as President. You're still not confident? Ah, there's the rub.

I now open the floor to debate. Comments?

Labels: democrats, election 2004, msm, republicans, terrorism

¶ 1:37 AM

Comments:

This is pretty much the way I reconcile being a libritarian and voting for Kerry as well. Personally it scares the bajezuz out of me, that someone that could appoint Ashcroft, getting to appoint 2-3 at a minimum or up to 8 justices to the Supream court.

In other news, it turns out the guy who was running that Electoral collage predictor site, turned out to be the infamous Andy Tannenbaum. :)

# posted by

maotig : 12:15 PM

Contributors