Indeed. If anyone takes offense, we’ll be in the right place when they flame us ;).
*“I’m essentially a social libertarian, and I don’t think either party really believes in the freedoms of the individual–just selected ones which they approve of. As I said in several other threads, I would have liked to be able to vote for Harry Browne, the Libertarian.” *
AG wasn’t my first choice either. I’d have preferred Bradley or, of course, Nader.
*"The Libertarians in effect partake of elements of both the Left and Right–they don’t really fit on the standard US political spectrum.
(I have a political science degree from Buttfuck State University–aren’t you glad you got me going on this stuff?)"*
Yeah, actually. I have a law degree but for work and for pleasure read lots of political theory.
I hear they have a very good program in poli sci over at BSU. Not to mention my favorite college basketball team, the Buttfuck Barn Animals. 
*“I had my areas of agreement and disagreement with both, albeit on different issues. That left the dreaded issue of character, and on the strength of that Bush got my vote. There has been far too much shit going on in the Clinton Administration, and Gore has been up to it in his eyeballs. “No controlling legal authority”…visits to Buddhist temples for campaign contributions…the “small bladder” defense…there’s no way in hell I’m going to endorse that with my vote–the Dems lost me when they nominated him. Bush, despite the rhetoric that you throw around, is neither stupid nor an empty vessel–I find him acceptable, if uninspiring. He’ll do stuff I won’t like, but so would Gore have.” *
I don’t admire the character of either of these guys–talk about sockpuppets! I don’t see that the Clinton administration is more tainted than any other recent administration–and certainly no more tainted than any Bush administration will be. All of them are guilty of selling themselves to the highest bidder; campaign financing is way of out control. It’s legalized corruption and it’s part of the reason why the majority of people in this country don’t even bother to vote.
OTOH, I do find Bush unintelligent, uninformed and inept; and I do believe that he appeals to embittered, hard-done-by people (“losers”) b/c of his lackluster credentials. Choosing between his character and Gore’s is, as one columnist I read said, like being lost at sea and choosing between drinking salt water and your own piss.
My views on why Bush is so bad (many of which you have seen in the Gore/Sore Loser thread) are much like Zut’s–the poster who started the “George W. Bush isn’t stupid” thread. I agree with everything Zut said except that Bush isn’t stupid. In my view Bush is stupid but that’s not the reason not to vote for him. (I’d vote for a stupid, untalented candidate whose views I agreed with at this point.)
The Republican platform on women’s reproductive rights is scary; the same goes for the regressive Supreme Court choices Bush would make. The idea that companies can be trusted not to pollute is absurd. And to marry self-regulation to tort reform is a downright crime against humanity. Giving tax cuts to billionaires at a time when the richest individuals own as much wealth as some nations is foolhardy and decadent. Privatizing part of social security is expensive, unnecessary and potentially ruinous. Allowing companies to swallow each other and become more powerful and monopolistic is irresponsible (though the Dems are almost as bad here). Bush’s supporters want to undermine the FCC, the EPA, the FDA. We need these things b/c, however imperfect, they are accountable to us in a way that multinational corporations are not. Finally, executing people who haven’t gotten a fair trial is totally reprehensible.
Libertarianism is a principled position but, IMO, it’s hopelessly unrealistic in a world dominated by corporate giants. Dismantling the government further is just bending over so as to allow corporations to screw us more effectively. That doesn’t mean the government sometimes doesn’t screw us. We need to pay attention to them; but at least they are ours (or could be if we made our own institutions work for us). Libertarians can work to keep government out of individuals’ privacy (e.g. giving women access to an abortion pill that’s been in Europe for fifteen years). But they should also work to protect people’s rights from exploitative business practices: for example, protecting school kids from having a lot of advertising crap thrown at them from the minute they can read. At the end of the day, only governments are strong enough to provide adequate balance for the unprecedented concentration of power in corporate hands. But people should be as active as they can too.
BTW, I believe that Limp Bizkit are Republicans, and that Trent Lott is a Green Day fan. Also Dennis Hastert was the model for the homophobic father in American Beauty.
As to Osip: I’m not sure if you read the thread Osip started. Osip was the first name of Mandelstam, the Russian poet who has inspired my handle and his.
"You should really lay into [Osip]–tell [him] that [his] mother wears army boots."
Actually, I wear army boots. It’s that old Sinead O’Connor thing.