"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Truth was never put to the worse in a free and open encounter..."
~ Milton
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin

Reading:
A Fistful of Euros
Andrew Tobias
Angry Liberal
Archy
Bad Attitudes
Common Dreams
Fablog
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
Madelaine Kane
Mahablog
Obsidian Wings
Off the Kuff
Orcinus
Sarah Kendzior
War and Piece
Washington Monthly

Books
The Emerging Democratic Majority (Judis & Teixeira)
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Franken)
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (Franken)
The True Believer (Hoffer)
Still Being Bushwhacked

All Book Reviews
Race, Gender, and Sexuality
It's always "us" vs "them"
Women's March on (fill in your location)
Children learn what their parents teach them.
You Got My Support. But.
Even Endangered Penguins Do It

All Race, Gender, and Sexuality
Campaigns and Voting
Where do we go from here?
It's always "us" vs "them"
Some interpretations
On and on I go
Just appalled

All Campaigns and Voting
Lecture Circuit
It Was 40 Years Ago Today
July 2, 1964
Pledge
May 14-15, 1970
The Erotica of Bare Knees

All Lecture Circuit
Media
The Liberal Media, At It Again
Fairly UNbalanced
P.S.
What's this?
OHMIGOD

All Media
Big Brother
Shoulda' Guessed
Where did my country go?
You know what you never thought you'd read?
Not in his name
Sleight of Hand

All Big Brother
World O'Blog
It's Vocabulary Time!
They wrote it
Mighty-fine blogging
Other People Said....
Phillipines

All World O'Blog
Aimless Ranting
It's always "us" vs "them"
So, I'm thinking with half my brain
Do You Know Peter?
Long, Little Privacy Rant
My Takeaway

All Aimless Ranting
Archives
February 05, 2017 - February 11, 2017
January 22, 2017 - January 28, 2017
January 15, 2017 - January 21, 2017
November 13, 2016 - November 19, 2016
October 09, 2016 - October 15, 2016

All Weekly Archives


Electioneering
Open Secrets
Political Wire Exit Polls
Politics1
Polling Report

Information
American Research Group
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Public Integrity
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Congressional Report Cards
Death Row Roll Call
DebtChannel.org
Democracy Now
Economic Policy Institute
FairVote Colorado
Foreign Policy In Focus
Global Exchange
Human Rights Watch
Independent Judiciary
Inequality
Institute on Money in State Politics
Institute for Public Accuracy
JobWatch
Lying in ponds
Media Reform
Media Transparency
Move On
One World
Open Democracy
Pew Research Center
Project Censored
Public Citizen Health Research Group
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Take Back The Media
The Urban Institute
WHO Outbreak News

Connections
XML & RDF
Peevish for PDA



Blog Directory


Search








Credits
Powered by Movable Type

Site Design by Sekimori





All content © 2002-2005 Anne Zook

February 03, 2004
Yo. Listen up!

This is directed at you on the conservative side of the political aisle, those disenchanted with the Bush Administration's version of 'fiscal responsibility.'

Please bear in mind that the primaries are not the elections. When you step into that voting booth on your state's primary day, whether it's today or sometime later in the cycle, you're not voting against liberals. You're voting for whatever conservative ideas you believe in.

Why not make that vote count? If you're not enamored of the current Administration's behavior, toss your primary vote toward a candidate whose ideas more closely fit yours. No, you're not going to trash the election and you're not going to prevent the George and Dick parade from winning the nomination, but you will send a clear message about the direction you want them to take in the unlikely event they should actually win the election.

I mean, I don't think it will do you much good because they didn't get even half the vote last time and they showed no compunction about dissing the opinions and desires of the majority of voters as well as defying the wishes of a lot of conservatives, and there's no way they can run for re-election again so they have nothing to lose this time but it's worth a try, right?

With absolutely zero assistance from the national media, there are four candidates who managed to attract a noticeable amount of attention in New Hampshire, each having secured more than 1% of the votes.*

There's Richard Bosa, who thinks this country has lost far too many manufacturing jobs and that this is largely because huge, multinational corporations own Congress in fee simple. There are a lot of people who might agree with him.

I'm not sure that his plan to bar all lawyers from public office is quite as rational. Him hating all lawyers isn't really much of a reason to bar everyone with knowledge of the law from serving in the government, but whatever. He might be flexible on that one. You could ask him.

Seriously, he advocates term limits (no more than two terms for any public office) and describes his platform this way:

"[Focusing] on the root core problem of the deterioration of values by government, not acknowledging constitutional guarantees, corrupt courts, silent press intimidated by lawyers, civic groups like the Chamber Of Commerce, NH Business and Industry working for self serving interests and the movement of JOBS by multinationals destroying NH and the US economy, and the lack of morals in the Catholic Church. I call this period 'The Medieval Dark Ages of the 21st Century' where greed, lust for wealth, property and control is the driving force for most individuals, corporations and government agencies."

There's John Rigazio, whose message is that we need to get out of the WTO. He feels strongly on this topic. Strongly enough to have, apparently, attempted to moon the press when discussing the subject. There aren't any pictures because, as I understand it, the press had gotten bored and left by that point, a thing for which we can all probably be profoundly grateful. And, in the interests of full disclosure, he only signed up as a Republican for the primaries because he said the Democratic leadership wasn't taking him seriously. He's pretty much spent his life on the Left.

[He is] against federal tax cuts, against free trade treaties like GATT & NAFTA, supports a substantial hike in the minimum wage, and favors a Canadian-style universal health-care system for the US. He also is refusing to accept any campaign contributions and vows to fund his NH primary campaign with $100,000 from his own pocket.

For the conspiracy-minded among you, there's John Buchanan who prides himself on being the one who discovered and revealed the Bush family's connection to the Nazis. He's a touch delusional (he really thought he was going to sweep New Hampshire out from under Bush's nose and further he actually thinks that Bush should be held accountable for things that may and/or may not have happened before his birth), but whatever.

His candidacy is specifically to shake up the White House, to send a message to the Bush Administration that the Party isn't happy with their behavior. Unfortunately, his platform sort of stops there. "[H]e is running in 2004 as a "peace candidate" and is seeking a "chance to be taken seriously as a 'Bush-stopper.""

That's a pretty sad group, isn't it? I'm afraid there were no other Republican contenders who managed to scoop in more than 1% of the vote in New Hampshire. (Several Democrats did, for what it's worth.)

I used to be worried about the Democrats, but after looking at the quality of candidates being fielded by the Republicans and realizing that there's no one of conscience and principle (and sanity) willing to stand up to the current Administration, I'm worried about the Right, instead. Where are the John McCain quality candidates this time? Did the Party leadership, aware of disaffection in the ranks, put out the word that they'd Take Steps against anyone making a serious push against the current Administration or something?

(* Material pulled from here and here.)

Posted by AnneZook at 10:56 AM


Comments

I was over on my blog struggling to write the same sort of thing - except I was thinking about the moderates in Congress. How are they able to swallow what they've been handed by this administration? They got the tax cuts cut in half - they stopped the Energy Bill - but they were bamboozled on Iraq and now we find out they were lied to about the cost of the Medicare Bill - the same one that took extortion to get through the House. How long will they put up with this? How powerful is Grover Norquist?

Posted by: eRobin at February 3, 2004 05:48 PM

There's nothing illegal or immoral about writing in John McCain or the Republican of your choice in the primary.

I think anyone willing to put up with what candidates go through today is either crazy or heroic.

Posted by: Bryan at February 3, 2004 09:04 PM

I was just thinking. I hear a lot about 'grass roots' action on the Left, people dissatisfied with the party and standing up to say so, but I know there are people of intelligence, good sense, and conscience on the Right and I'm surprised that I haven't really heard much about a concerted effort to send a message of disapproval to the White House.

Not, as I said in the post, that I think the Bush Administration would pay any attention. In the unlikely event Bush/Cheney gets re-elected, they won't be eligible for re-election and a politican who isn't running for office has no reason to be responsive to the voters. B/C hasn't been that responsive up until now, so I dread to think what they'll try to push through under those circumstances.

Posted by: Anne at February 4, 2004 08:37 AM