Take back your rights!

Blog of personal philosophy, advocating liberty.

Wednesday, June 30, 2004

Don't accept a lesser or a least of evils

I asked yesterday, "So are our choices only statist candidates, advocates of a fascist welfare state?"
I answered, correctly, "No."
You've seen the Bush-Ashcroft administration initiate a war, ponder bringing back the military draft, increase federal spending to obscene levels, and impose and try to impose federal restrictions on private and personal relationships and actions.
Let's be honest: Cutting taxes was one positive move by the George W. Bush administration, but it was almost negated by the increased spending, especially when so much of it is pork.
The other old party alternative is John Kerry. If he were (God forbid) president, we would see more of the same, except with higher taxes.
A Ralph Nader administration might be bearable because of a bipartisan gridlock (that is, the Republocrats would not cooperate, simply because of party politics). Still a (shudder) President Nader would try desperately to institute an omnipotent Nanny State.
All three of the above presidential candidates are advocates of a fascist welfare state, one that regulates and regiments and controls individual lives.
Individuals who prefer freedom, who believe they own their own lives and are not property, are not cogs in the giant machine of the giant state -- these are the types of people who originally built this New World, and they were the Founding Fathers of what started out as a free country.
(Oh, yes, I know there were anomalies, but basically and essentially these United States were free.)
So who can individualists and freedom seekers vote for?
One man: Michael Badnarik.
Michael Badnarik is the Libertarian Party candidate.
You can find more information about the Libertarian Party at
and I hope you will link there.
Also, every chance you get, contact your friendly neighborhood "news" medium and ask sweetly, "Say, why don't you ever mention the Libertarian Party?"
And please share any answer you get with me.
Also please remember: If you don't make some kind of effort, you never will regain those freedoms with which you were endowed by nature and which supposedly were protected by the Constitution.
Take back your rights.


  • At 7:09 PM, Blogger D. R. Zinn said…

    I can certainly understand the dilemma of those who vote for "the lesser of two evils" so as not to let the other win.

    But there is a middle ground: if you live in a swing state go ahead and vote for the lesser of two evils. If you live in a solid red or blue state vote your conscience.


  • At 12:30 AM, Blogger Michael Morrison said…

    Well, my whole point is this: Do NOT vote for a lesser evil, no matter what color your state is. Damn, what I said was, do NOT settle. Don't try to be a political strategist and try to help a supposedly lesser evil. DO vote your conscience. DO vote for the person you think fits your own beliefs best. It is downright unintelligent to vote against your own beliefs, and then hope some day to gain your goal. Not smart at all.


Post a Comment

<< Home