So you agree with me that education should be far more privatized than it is now? If not, please explain how that is consistent with your stated principles.

Well, at least Syn and I can agree on that.

In my view, I think that there are far too many ideas, opinions and beliefs among Americans to believe that a single legislative body can provide a consensus that would appeal to the majority. I’m personally not too happy with at least half of the Democrats agenda, but I wasn’t happy with at least half of the Republicans agenda. In all, its simply seems that what works in New York, probably doesn’t work in Mississippi and what works in Texas probably won’t work in Maine. We unfortunately seem to have this false idea that simply because we are all in a national border that we all have the same values, beliefs and world views (or at least “close enough”). However, this simply doesn’t seem to be the case. Local government, whenever possible, seems far more likely to provide solutions that local citizens will agree with.

I think that our government (particularly since the early 20th century) has moved away from the original design for this nation and toward a more monolithic government. We have allowed the Federal government to simply absorb more and more control over the whole Republic. If we don’t curtail this then eventually, it won’t matter which party is in government because no matter the party, the effect will be Big Government, no States rights and full control of our lives from Washington.

This isn’t just a problem for the “Left”. When the Republicans held power they too administered over a Federal mess that constantly and consistently took more and more power. Consider, for example, the invasion of personal privacy and State jurisdiction in the situation with Terri Schaivo (which stunk of a political ploy), or the fact that the federal government refused to accept that the People of several states have voted to legalize medical marijuana. Hell, under this current administration, the GAO actually said that the Drug Czar (why do we have a ‘czar’ anyway?) was allowed to lie in order to prosecute the War on Drugs! Consider the creation of Homeland Security, another example of bigger, not smaller government (and NOLA provided a great example of why well trained local government should be used, rather than a monolithic federal one).

At one time, Conservatives were the people I trusted not to stick their nose in my life… or to stick their federal policies in my State. Yet, now, both parties and the federal government as a whole seem bent on screwing us out of our rights.

I plan to vote based on the individual running and screw the party, as of yet I haven’t seen a sensible statement about international policy from any of the contenders, I haven’t seen a policy I like for social issues yet either. The Dems seem pretty secularly Statist (and anti-war… with no useful options) currently and the Republicans running seem either Statist or religiously Statist (and only spout platitudes or useless “We embolden the enemy if we debate…” bullshit). No one seems to have any actual ideas on how to fix the mess we’re in, either at home or abroad.

Maybe Jesse Ventura will come out as a Dark Horse

My hesitation isn’t about right-winger concerns it is about electing politicans who will not lead America down the road to serfdom and so far any social liberal elected ends up enacting laws and regulations designed to restrict our freedoms. All for the good of the masses of course.

Now some NY State Liberal is calling for a law banning the use of ‘listening to Ipods while crossing the street’.

Terrye,
Your assumption about Pat Buchanan is absurd. You may be surpirsed to learn that if we would just allow our Republic function as it was designed, that being each State be allowed to legislate their laws, people will vote accordingly. Like the recent case in NC regarding abortion, contrary to the scare tactics by Planned Parenthood and NOW the people voted NOT to ban abortion.

Just because I believe in a funtioning Republic based upon Constitutional law and not Collectivist Statist totalitarianism doesn’t make me a far-rightwing extremist it make me an ordinary American.

I rarely make political predictions on this site but I think I can safely say that the chances of Rudy Giuliani, if elected, trying to repeal the Second Amendment are about as great as my spending next Christmas on Alpha Centauri.

Wyatt Earp took the guns away from cowboys when they entered the city limits, that did not mean he wanted to overturn the second amendment.

It is perhaps worth pointing out that Tombstone was not in one of the states of the U.S. at the time; it was merely a territory.

My dream candidate would be one who would protect and defend the entire Constitution, be willing to let our military fight the war without all the second guessing from the caviar-and-champaign set at the State Department, and control the border.

At the same time my dream candidate would not make wedge issues out of whom I choose to have as my life partner, or whether I subscribe to the candidate’s particular belief set.

As was mentioned Gulliani had a 91% approval rating in NYC after the attack there on 9/11. So it seems the people who actually live in the city were under the impression that he did plenty. He may not be far enough to the right for you, but no one who is can win anyway. That is not meant to be unkind, it is just true.

Wyatt Earp took the guns away from cowboys when they entered the city limits, that did not mean he wanted to overturn the second amendment.

http://tinyurl.com/2uaffw