Why I can't vote Badnarik

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

From Badnarik's response to the latest OBL tape:

"I believe that a libertarian non-interventionist policy might have averted the 9/11 tragedy and reduces the likelihood of similar tragedies in the future."

No.  Sorry, YOU FAIL IT.

Thanks for playing, though.

[John Dibble]

Who knows, it MAY have. However, the same statement did say that OBL should be hunted down and brought to justice.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Who knows, it MAY have. However, the same statement did say that OBL should be hunted down and brought to justice.

Yes, I give him that, but international terror happens all over the world against completely non-interventionist countries, such as Russia.  If Badnarik thinks that the goal of the terrorists is to keep us out of their affairs, then he completely doesn't get it.

[John Dibble]

Who knows, it MAY have. However, the same statement did say that OBL should be hunted down and brought to justice.

Yes, I give him that, but international terror happens all over the world against completely non-interventionist countries, such as Russia.  If Badnarik thinks that the goal of the terrorists is to keep us out of their affairs, then he completely doesn't get it.

Well, the 'goal of terrorists' is pretty broad. If we truly wanted to fight a war on terror, we'd be fighting it in many more countries than we do now - we really only care about the ones that bother us. I'm sure Badnarik doesn't think all terror results from interventionism - the Oklahoma bombing was done by a U.S. citizen, after all. Internal terrorism is certainly a threat.

Part of the problem I think is that we group 'terrorism' into one group. Islamic terrorists don't have the same goals as Irish terrorists. Internal terrorists have different goals than foreign ones. Bush, Kerry, Badnarik, and everyone else oversimplifies the problem as far as I'm concerned. Of course, Al-Queda is made up of many groups itself, so each cell really has it's own agenda - some wish just to be left alone, some just hate us because we aren't Muslim. I just agree more with Badnarik on what should be done - basically I think we should bring those that attack or attempt to attack us to justice and leave everyone else alone for the most part.

[Bono]

Who knows, it MAY have. However, the same statement did say that OBL should be hunted down and brought to justice.

Yes, I give him that, but international terror happens all over the world against completely non-interventionist countries, such as Russia.  If Badnarik thinks that the goal of the terrorists is to keep us out of their affairs, then he completely doesn't get it.

Rusia's attacks have to do with their own internal problems, ie, Tetchenia.

[??????????]

I'm sure Badnarik doesn't think all terror results from interventionism - the Oklahoma bombing was done by a U.S. citizen, after all. Internal terrorism is certainly a threat.

Well, done by US citizens..but sponsered by..well nevermind.

[angus]

Who knows, it MAY have. However, the same statement did say that OBL should be hunted down and brought to justice.

Yes, I give him that, but international terror happens all over the world against completely non-interventionist countries, such as Russia.  If Badnarik thinks that the goal of the terrorists is to keep us out of their affairs, then he completely doesn't get it.

Rusia's attacks have to do with their own internal problems, ie, Tetchenia.

happens here too.  we seem to have forgotten terrorists of the home-grown variety.  e.g., timothy mcveigh, professor unabomber, etc.

[ilikeverin]

That is the wrong reason not to vote Badnarik

[DanielX]

My opinion: Badnarik has some good ideas about domestic policy, but for foreign policy... he sounds kinda nuts. Plus, he once compared FDR and Lincoln to Hitler. I mean, the 'taking government where it shouldn't've gone' bit is okay, but Honest Abe as Adolf the barbarian? Does not compute....


Result: Re-elect Bush-Cheney, and hope the Libertarians run a saner candidate in '08.

[??????????]

My opinion: Badnarik has some good ideas about domestic policy, but for foreign policy... he sounds kinda nuts. Plus, he once compared FDR and Lincoln to Hitler. I mean, the 'taking government where it shouldn't've gone' bit is okay, but Honest Abe as Adolf the barbarian? Does not compute....


Result: Re-elect Bush-Cheney, and hope the Libertarians run a saner candidate in '08.

No Lincoln wasnt Hitler..he was much closer to Stalin actually.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

My opinion: Badnarik has some good ideas about domestic policy, but for foreign policy... he sounds kinda nuts. Plus, he once compared FDR and Lincoln to Hitler. I mean, the 'taking government where it shouldn't've gone' bit is okay, but Honest Abe as Adolf the barbarian? Does not compute....


Result: Re-elect Bush-Cheney, and hope the Libertarians run a saner candidate in '08.

No Lincoln wasnt Hitler..he was much closer to Stalin actually.

Fascism/Stalinism is a purely 20th Century phenomenon, and can't happen without mass communication.  Lincoln was much closer to Oliver Cromwell.

[Bono]

My opinion: Badnarik has some good ideas about domestic policy, but for foreign policy... he sounds kinda nuts. Plus, he once compared FDR and Lincoln to Hitler. I mean, the 'taking government where it shouldn't've gone' bit is okay, but Honest Abe as Adolf the barbarian? Does not compute....


Result: Re-elect Bush-Cheney, and hope the Libertarians run a saner candidate in '08.

No Lincoln wasnt Hitler..he was much closer to Stalin actually.

Fascism/Stalinism is a purely 20th Century phenomenon, and can't happen without mass communication.  Lincoln was much closer to Oliver Cromwell.

Olivr Cromwell replaced a corrupt tyrany for a soud government. Lincoln was a federal tyrant who ended freedom in the US for ever.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

My opinion: Badnarik has some good ideas about domestic policy, but for foreign policy... he sounds kinda nuts. Plus, he once compared FDR and Lincoln to Hitler. I mean, the 'taking government where it shouldn't've gone' bit is okay, but Honest Abe as Adolf the barbarian? Does not compute....


Result: Re-elect Bush-Cheney, and hope the Libertarians run a saner candidate in '08.

No Lincoln wasnt Hitler..he was much closer to Stalin actually.

Fascism/Stalinism is a purely 20th Century phenomenon, and can't happen without mass communication.  Lincoln was much closer to Oliver Cromwell.

Olivr Cromwell replaced a corrupt tyrany for a soud government. Lincoln was a federal tyrant who ended freedom in the US for ever.

Oliver Cromwell replaced a corrupt tyranny with a corrupt tyranny.  (I specialized in 17th Century England).

Your statement about Lincoln would seem especially absurd to those who are descended from slaves.  Like me, except the slaves that I'm descended from were the ones who built the Pyramids :-).

[The Dowager Mod]

My opinion: Badnarik has some good ideas about domestic policy, but for foreign policy... he sounds kinda nuts. Plus, he once compared FDR and Lincoln to Hitler. I mean, the 'taking government where it shouldn't've gone' bit is okay, but Honest Abe as Adolf the barbarian? Does not compute....


Result: Re-elect Bush-Cheney, and hope the Libertarians run a saner candidate in '08.

No Lincoln wasnt Hitler..he was much closer to Stalin actually.

Fascism/Stalinism is a purely 20th Century phenomenon, and can't happen without mass communication.  Lincoln was much closer to Oliver Cromwell.

Olivr Cromwell replaced a corrupt tyrany for a soud government. Lincoln was a federal tyrant who ended freedom in the US for ever.

Oliver Cromwell replaced a corrupt tyranny with a corrupt tyranny.  (I specialized in 17th Century England).

Your statement about Lincoln would seem especially absurd to those who are descended from slaves.  Like me, except the slaves that I'm descended from were the ones who built the Pyramids :-).

I specialised in medieval english generally 10th-15th centuries

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I specialised in medieval english generally 10th-15th centuries

Don't get me started on that usurping bastard Henry Bolingbroke.  :-)  Or that genocidal lunatic Edward I.  Actually, I find it difficult to pick a favorite monarch from that period, but I'd have to go with Richard I.  Or Henry VII (the man was a freakin' genius), but he doesn't really belong to that period, even though he took over in 1485.

[badnarikin04]

All his policies make perfect sense to me.


You know Bush's paranoia-building is working when it takes effect on liberals.