Wednesday, April 05, 2006
The Libercontrarian…
...Is no longer a Libertarian.
Which, if I weren’t so damned tired, might lead me to write a post about how I’ve come to believe that none of the political parties are principled, but that their members most certainly can be. In the same way that a self-proclaimed Christian might also be a liar, a cheat, and an all around jerk, a person’s membership in the Republican (or Democrat or Green or Libertarian) party carries no guaranty of upstanding personal values.
Where does that leave me as a voter? Trying to make the best, most informed, and most ethically consistent choices that I can. It means voting for people that I think will take our national security, economic dangers, and personal freedoms seriously. It means that in recognizing that our elected leaders (and party leaders) don’t always act in a principled or intelligent fashion, I might have to do my part to pick up the slack.
Just kidding. Sort of.
I understand my friend’s disillusionment--and, in fact, I sympathize with it. It’s sad that it commonly leads to people who intentionally divorce themselves from our political processes (although I doubt that could ever happen with this gentleman).

Comments & Trackbacks
Huh?
How in the heck does this have anything to do with American Idol?!?!
Nathan: The Mockerator.
The Libertarian Party has driven away yet another member: I'm a party-free kind of guy right now. I was a...
I don’t know whether you realize that your post starts:
“David_J
“...Is no longer a Libertarian.”
Because it does, you know.
Which makes the rest of the article rather confusing. (If you want to do that trendy start-the-post-in-the-title thing, you might want you move the standard position your name is published in.)
As to the substance, I’m with Mike Rosen: vote for the viable party that comes closest to matching your views, because party trumps person. It’s all about the caucus.
TW: soviet. I don’t know what that means here, but it’s a bit disturbing.