Wednesday
(1)I was reminded today of something Ayn Rand wrote in the run-up to the 1972 election:
I am not an admirer of President Nixon, as my readers know. But I urge every able-minded voter, of any race, creed, color, age, sex, or political party, to vote for Nixon as a matter of national emergency. This is no longer an issue of choosing the lesser of two commensurate evils. The choice is between a flawed candidate representing Western civilization and the perfect candidate of its primordial enemies... If there were some campaign organization called 'Anti-Nixonites for Nixon,' it would name my position.
Maybe this is suggests a reason why liberty-lovers the world over should be cracking open the champagne today.
I voted for Great Cthulu.
Why settle for the lesser of two evils?
Posted by kbarrett at November 3, 2004 11:21 PM
The quote postulates that Bush is not "the perfect candidate of its primordial enemies"; that in fact Kerry is. Seeing as how Bush has essentially created Al Qaeda all by himself, remind me how the quote is not horse poop?
Posted by DaBeeeenster at November 3, 2004 11:36 PM
You mean after the Patriot Act?
Or, in the (near) future, Patriot Act 2 to further destroy the liberties of Americans?
Posted by jimdgriz at November 3, 2004 11:46 PM
jimdgriz writes:
"Or, in the (near) future, Patriot Act 2 to further destroy the liberties of Americans?"
I dunno... All these new Left-liberals here today, hissing and spluttering like so many abandoned kettles.
Why, if we could harness all that redundant energy, we'd be able to... umm... tear-up Kyoto, perhaps?
Posted by GCooper at November 4, 2004 12:01 AM
Poor liberals, they're going to have wait another four years for a turn at dismantling Western culture. But at least they can always depend on the Muslim vote.
Posted by Vanya at November 4, 2004 12:56 AM
"Seeing as how Bush has essentially created Al Qaeda all by himself"
Yeah right. Got any more of what your smoking? Sounds like good stuff dude.
Posted by Shawn at November 4, 2004 01:32 AM
I do think it's strange that a bunch of so-called libertarians are so happy that a huge government republican won (yet to veto his first bill??????).
With majorities in both houses (worse news than the presidential election) they's gonna be spending like there's no tomorrow.
Posted by Michael Farris at November 4, 2004 02:40 AM
The choice between Nixon and McGoven who was in favor of surrendering to the North Vietnamese Communists and the Khemer Rouge was obviously what Rand was talking about.
She's an odd figure, sometimes way out of line and sometimes spot on. I think she must have had George Soros in mind when she said that "the greatest threat to democracy is from the very rich and the very poor'.
Like so many democrats of his generatioin Kerry got his real start in politics working for Mc Govern and he's never gotten over it.
Posted by spacer (New York) at November 4, 2004 03:01 AM
I doubt Bush is of enough consequence to actually create Al Qaeda but I don't think he's reason to celebrate.
Posted by Andrew Robb at November 4, 2004 04:00 AM
Michael Farris wrote:
"With majorities in both houses (worse news than the presidential election) they's gonna be spending like there's no tomorrow."
You're mistaken. The National Taxpayer's Union Foundation did a fiscal analysis this morning (November 3rd) of the incoming Senate. They conclude:
"The bottom line is that supporters of limited government and lower taxes got very good news in the 2004 Senate elections. Come January 2005, taxpayers will have new allies in the Senate on critical votes on appropriations bills, budget process reform, pending energy and transportation bills bloated with pork, Social Security reform, and tax relief."
It's helpful to be informed.
Posted by Anthony at November 4, 2004 04:29 AM
Ok, so maybe there's enough reason for a few beers.
Posted by Andrew Robb at November 4, 2004 04:50 AM
Kerry is just a friggin' Democrat. He's not the anti-christ, and even if he were he would have been fighting with the Republican congress.
Now, what we have has some small but startling similarities to a banana republic. We've already had Bush I, we've had Bush IIa, and now we're working on Bush IIb. In the near future we're going to perhaps be forced to accept Bush IIIa, Bush IIIb, Bush IVa, Bush IVb, and who knows how many more. "Liberty-lovers" indeed, Winston.
I posted Should conservatives support Kerry? the day before the election, but apparently I didn't get enough hits from Ohio.
Posted by The Lonewacko Blog at November 4, 2004 05:43 AM
I have conflicting emotions: On the one hand I'm glad that Bush won, but am somewhat dismayed that it was of all things the issue of gay marriage (and the banning thereof) that motivated people to reelect Bush.
Look at this:
Wake Up, Democrats: Gay Marriage Is a Great Way To Energize Republicans
href="http://andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/2004_10_31_dish_archive.html#109954150218074414">Emails to Andrew Sullivan
Let's wait a bit with the celebrations, an assertive social conservative agenda might have priority for Bush II.
Posted by Ralf Goergens at November 4, 2004 10:49 AM
I messed up the second link, so here it is again:
I also have to say that this makes me gladder than ever that Buttiglione got sent packing by the EU parliament.
Posted by Ralf Goergens at November 4, 2004 10:55 AM
