I’m only one square to your right. We are more alike than different, it would seem!
Well, at least on a little 10-question quiz. And yet, knowing that we scored so closely makes me wonder just HOW you can so rabidly (heh!) support the current administration. Seems like you and bx should use your considerable intellects to help further the cause of ‘true libertarianism,’ instead of supporting the pro-corporate-welfare bunch.
Ideologically, I thought, the quiz touches on just about every basic issue. M may leave room for strange result, however.
Republicanism is pretty close to Libertarianism, while todays Democrats are getting pretty close to socialism. I’m forced to chose between candidates that I’m not totally thrilled over because we are a two party system.
I was disappointed with the way the Clintons ran their presidency, and the party (and those they’ve brought forth as candidates) seems to only be getting worse. Now we have Dean trying his best to increase the racial divide in this country to further the Democratic vote, I think that is despicable! This is a time for healing those divides. People of all races have been reaching out to help one another, and we should celebrate that, not insist that the opposite is true.
Also, I was raised by a socially liberal gov. employee who showed me first hand the problems with gov. bureaucracy, affirmative action and forced busing. I’m a mixed breed.
Yes, it does cover the basic issues, but as we know, the devil is in the details.
I don’t understand how you can believe that Republianism is close to Libertarianism. If anything, Lib. is closer to Constitutionalism.
Ack! Don’t even get me started on the “two-party system”. That is NOT what is set up in our Constitution, and that’s not how the country used to be – whatever happened to the Whig party? The only reason we have a “two party system” is because the two parties involved made it that way! Sadly, I think the individuals in charge of the Reps and the Dems are far to similar in their desire for wealth and power, and their lack of care for anyone or anything that stands in their way. ANYWAY, I think the best thing that could happen in this country would be an end to the “two party” nonsense, and the emergence of stronger, more viable alternatives. I happen to believe that the Libertarians could be that group; sadly, too many people have come to think that they have to choose between only a giant douche and a turd sandwich at election time (thanks, South Park!).
Ok, I have to go home already – it’s threatening rain, and I rode the bike, so I gotta boogie.
Oh, and yeah – Dean’s a loon. He and W have more in common than they’d like to believe. They ain’t uniters, that’s for sure.
There is nothing in the constitution or law that *forces* a two party system. Historically, there has usually only been two dominant parties although the two parties have been exchanged over time. Recently, we have seen the Libertarians, Green Party, whatever Perot’s people called themselves, others, in addition to the two big idiot parties. The thing is that the parties need real support to gain any sort of power and that support has been not there for any new party for the last century or more. Personally, I think regulations supporting matching campaign funds if candidates have a certain amount of support is bogus and stifles political evolution. No party should get matching funds, or only parties with *less* than a certain amount of support.
I think part of the reason why the support isn’t there for viable third, fourth, fifth, whatever parties is that the TBIPs have folks brainwashed into believing that they ARE the only options, and that supporting other parties is a waste of time, and a waste of one’s vote.
Agreed on the matching campaign funds stuff. Wow! We agree!?!?!?!
I think part of the problem with all the parties these days is that they’re being run by the outermost fringe elements from each group (Rep. by X-tian Right, big business interests; Dem. by bleeding heart left-wing loons; Greens by perhaps overly-rabid enviros; Libs. by anarchists), rather than by their more moderate bases.
I saw a fellow on the Daily Show a while back – I wish I could remember who it was – who was discussing this, and mentioned that “it’s hard to rally people around the cry, ‘Be Reasonable!'” But it make me wish for a Centrist Party, or a Reasonable Party, or Moderates United Party. Or something like that.