It was interesting to read your opinions in the thread on the Republican Party split.
Senator WMS: Why are you libertarian when your social score is positive (authoritarian) while your economic score is negative (economic left)? Admittedly, your scores are very close to neutrality, but I expected a libertarian to be in the opposite quadrant of the political compass.
Insomnia is irritating...
Anyway, first off, just call me WMS - the Senator bit is just there to clarify things in Fantasy Elections Land.
Actually, I am not libertarian, but lean populist instead. I voted Libertarian because, well, look at the Presidential candidates? Do you see a populist anywhere? I went with 'least objectionable third party candidate'. So you're right - I am really a soc right econ left (although not too far in either direction) individual.
Now, as to the ever-popular why...
Why not a Dem: well, I'm pro-life (a pretty big factor actually), pro-personal responsibility, pro-gun rights, pro-efficient government, have great respect for the small entrepreneurs who somehow create a self-sustaining business, anti-affirmative action, pro-military, not a pacifist, I don't 'blame America first' for things, anti-crime and anti-criminal, anti-Hollywood (and the, yes, coarseness of the culture), pro-religion in general (I think it's a good thing, and despise the secularists who want to scour it from public life), I believe the nuclear family and the middle class is the absolute heart and soul of America - these are the people who hold the country together and propel us forward (note that I include the working class as part of this group), anti-the parasitic layer of the lower classes (as separate from the working poor, who I strongly support lifting up out of poverty), and in general I strongly dislike the leftist interest groups that dominate the Dems. Also, the Dems are too tolerant of public sector corruption.
Why not a Rep: pro-some form of national health care, pro-workers' rights, pro-some system that enables everyone to get a good education, I'm not rabidly anti-government, generally pro-union (although the antics of some U.S. unions really get trying at times), anti-corporate/business abuses (Enron, anyone?), pro-regulation (within reason, but the idea that businesses are going to be angels without anyone looking over their shoulders is ridiculous), not very fond of the upper classes as a whole (especially their parasitic layer), anti-imperialist (to balance out my anti-pacifist side; just call me Trumanesque), I think some of the Republicans need to loosen up just a tad on some things (stop trying to ban my fantasy and sci-fi books, damnit!), pro-marijuana legalization (and taxation; subject to rules combining elements of tobacco and alcohol regulations), anti-prison abuses (balancing out my anti-criminal stance), I think companies have responsibilities that reach beyond just making their stockholders wealthy, and in general I strongly dislike a lot of the interest groups that dominate the Reps. Also, the Reps are too tolerant of private sector corruption.
And in general: The Golden Rule > The Virtue of Selfishness
*second edit*
The Doctrine of Personal Responsibility.
What you do, you pay the price for, whether good or bad. You NEVER make another pay the price for your own actions, regardless of where on the political spectrum you are.
*second edit*
That combined with my Doctrine Of Personal Responsibility leads me to conclude that
neither party fits my beliefs, and is not likely to anytime soon. I also think both parties warp the hell out of electoral law to preserve their own power, and consider neither one to truly be interested in serving the needs of the people. I am concerned with the degradation of the culture, and hold both parties culpable for that.
*new edited part* I'm also pro-gay rights, pro-civil unions, and ambivalent on gay marriage. Added to that, I'm fairly federalist on a lot of things.
*severely new edited part*
Here is the start of a good discussion of my abortion position. Yes, I'm time-warping the hell out of this post now, but tough.
*end severely new edited part*
You should treat people as people, not as objects. And to respect life, that means respecting the lives of the unborn and animals, too.
How you - and society in general - treat those who are weakest is the test of your - and a society's - ultimate character. And far too many people put personal selfishness over personal compassion, in BOTH parties.
Did that make it clear to everyone?
