hm.
i'm a registered independent voter; i decline to ever claim affiliation to a political party.
this election year, i plan to vote for the most likely guy to win who isn't bush. it's the only way i know how that i can fire bush for terrible lies, wrongdoings, and manipulation of an entire society.
it's ironic, too, considering the office of the presidency is a public service job; i am his boss. why is it so hard to fire someone for incompetence?
and you should understand something about naysaying: it's great for american society. rejection of the vast majority of bills and policy change ideas is what keeps us grounded. when we have lots of party interest, and two opposing parties between the legislative and executive branches, we have a great deal of stuff getting flamed out of existence. what DOESN'T get flamed out of existence is usually good for america as a whole, because both parties agreed it could pass.
the american system is structured so that it's easy to prevent change, but tough to create it. it's intrinsically cautious and it's absolutely the right way to do things. i'd rather have small, incremental growth in the right direction than fast, wild growth in many wrong directions all at once.
real republicans aren't bad: ideals of personal responsibility, limited government, protection of individual rights, and less public spending are all things that work for me.
ironically, the guys in office have scored ABSOLUTELY THE OPPOSITE OF EACH OF THOSE in the name of "republicanism." they couldn't BE more liberal.
real democrats aren't bad either: ideals of caring for the community in which you live, supporting public education, and the placement of individual rights over those of businesses are also things that all work for me.
it's all the fucking frauds that you have to watch out for; they abuse the system and they break the public trust.
