Regular readers of my posts already know that my voting for Lame John McCain in November is a non-starter. I have also recently rejected Barack Obama as a potential recipient of my vote. In response to a comment to that post, I announced that Ralph Nader (just named the candidate of the Peace and Freedom Party) need not apply for it either.
So who is left for me to consider?
There is Bob Barr, whose Libertarian Party candidacy isn't getting much media coverage anymore. I looked up his website to investigate his suitability for office, and came away disillusioned. While he does see the problems facing the United States, his proposed solutions will IMHO only exacerbate them.
On an environmental level, I'm sympathetic to the Green Party, but their economic planks still need to be nailed down to a realistic framework that doesn't cause more pain than it solves. The Libertarian-offshoot Personal Choice Party of Utah and the Socialist Liberty Union Party offer up only the most laissez-faire of platforms, so they are out, due to the fact that a non-governing government will only make it easier for the opportunists to take advantage of the rest of us.
Speaking of the Socialists - and their cousins, the Socialist Workers Party - they need to update their political outlooks. In calling for public ownership of private industry and business, do they not note how corporate corruption is at the heart of the current government? Moving title out of the private sector into the public is not going to affect that corruption one little bit. It would merely switch sides to retain the power. And, as a special to the SWP, if the workers of America won't stand up to defend their rights and privileges under the Demublican Repocrats, why would they following you?
I am not a Christian in the literal sense and I don't share the desire of the most radical of that sectarian sector to make the Bible the law of the land, so Pastor Chuck Baldwin's Constitution Party (a misnomer if ever there was one for a Biblical law adherent!) is out. I am not a drinker, but the one-issue Prohibition Party doesn't quench my political thirst. The Party for Socialism and Liberation is a one-trick pony which ignores domestic issues entirely, and this year's election should be all about the problems facing the home front.
Article comments
1 - Joanne Huspek
"No - Paris isn't the right choice. She's still a bit too flighty and juvenile."
I used to think so, until lately. Now I'm seeing her in a whole new light. Environmentally concious, shrewd with a buck, and master spin doctor. Just what the country needs.
Seriously, though, I'm in the same political voting quandry. I like some qualities of both major candidates, but I'm not sure I want to vote for either one.
2 - Lee Richards
Paris for president:
Positive - Already had her scandals.
Negative - Could have more and better ones.
Maybe we need an American Idol format for choosing a president. Start with a bunch on a TV show and vote some off each week until there's a winner. I can't see Obama and McCain as the two finalists, if contestants(candidates)have to be smart, creative, winning, able, and answer tough questions week after week without spin or mud.
Our presidential electoral system is old-fashioned and easy for politicians to corrupt, control and manipulate. We're forced into bad choices by shenanigans and trickery, like a magician forces a card he chooses into the hand of a dupe from the audience.
The best we can do this year is re-make congress, removing as many incumbants as possible, and sending a message to the parties they serve.
3 - Cindy D
Paris Hilton. Hrmm, looks good to me. I like her thinking at the end here:
Paris Hilton's Response to John McCain's Ad
4 - Dan Miller
For those of us who wish there were a "None of the Above" on the ballot, she would be a good alternative. It would be a lot more fun to cast a No vote by picking her than any of the others.
Dan
5 - Dr Dreadful
To Realist and others who seem to be rejecting all-comers whilst awaiting a flawless candidate with whose platform they are in complete agreement, I would only observe that it's going to be a long wait.
Time to get Real.
6 - Kevin Houston
While Chuck Baldwin does seem to be calling for Biblical law to rule the hearts of men, I don't see him calling for it to rule the courts of the United States of America.
I am perfectly willing to educated on this issue, if anyone knows of a statement by Mr. Baldwin in which he promotes the Bible over the Constitution within the court system, I would like to be informed of it - as it would preclude me from voting for him as well.
Unless and until someone can point me to such a statement, I find Chuck Baldwin to be the least objectionable candidate running.