Isn’t that an oxymoron? How many people voted for Bill Clinton because of his charisma? How many people voted for George W. Bush because of his Christian beliefs? How many people support Barack Obama because he’s black or Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman? How many people vote for a Democratic candidate or Republican candidate simply because they want the “most electable” candidate rather than voting for the candidate who best represents their views? How many people vote in the general election but not the primary? How many people vote for presidents but not Congressmen? How many people still believe that their vote will actually change the nature of our government? The myth of the intelligent voter is just that – a myth.

Lew Rockwell regularly publishes the writings of Gary North, far and away the best writer on his site. Gary North’s father-in-law was R.J. Rushdoony, one of the bigwigs in the Reconstructionist movement. North himself is not a libertarian but a reconstructionist. But other than stoning homosexuals – and perhaps banning the consumption of shrimp and bacon – North is a free-market guy.

Rockwell, of course, doesn’t publish North’s calls for stoning homosexuals, and I definitely don’t think Rockwell is a Reconstructionist himself. By all accounts he’s an ancap. But the fringe is a small world, n’est-ce pas?

Romney is ruled by a belief that political truth is a narrow shifting band that is wedged between constantly shifting special interests, and that the longer a politician can stay in that band, the better for America.

And Giuliani is ruled by a blind trust in authoritarianism, where freedom is the result of submission of one’s discreation to a massive, beaurocratic, institution – run by him.

Out of the these only Paul appeals to me. He is ruled by a belief that the rule of law and the Constitution is the guiding principle of our governmental authority, and while it may cause problems because it is imperfect, the problems should be dealt with by Amendment not the fallacious expediency of disregard.

I would wholeheartedly disagree with your comment. Even the Bible talks about the wrath of God and how he allowed his followers to destroy cities and kill and plunder that which remained. As Jesus would say, he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Contrary to your belief, real Christians CAN believe in the death penalty as a viable form of punishment, even in this “enlightened” age. That goes for the war in Iraq as well. It seems you disagree that the west had a moral obligation to go to war in the first place, at least without declaring it. I’d say that’s mostly a political argument regarding what is “just” when it comes to war and I don’t really think it has that much to do with Christianity or a second coming of the Crusades. Anyway…

As far as Huckabee goes, he’s a scary guy that I will NOT trust in the White House. He seems more preoccupied with how he can use the institution of the Presidency as a catalyst for a moral revival that includes using big government and more “compassionate conservatism” to accomplish those goals. This man cannot be POTUS.

All kidding aside, this race is turning out to be pretty terrifying. On the Democratic ticket, we have populists, economic tyrants, and candidates with a record of supporting some of the worst legislation ever to come out of Washington. On the Republican ticket, we have populists, militaristic tyrants, and candidates trying to out-do each other in terms of who will be more likely to oppress non-Christians. On both tickets, we have people whose positions are acceptable to both sides but who are getting little to no coverage or support. We have party rules being bent and broken and otherwise consistent celebrities becoming single-issue voters. The only comfort for me is that I will not be having children and therefore won’t have to explain to the next generation(s) why they’re living in a screwed up world. This could be the true end of life in America as we know it (just as the elections of Lincoln and FDR were the end of states’ rights and individualism). At least no child will be forced to endure the changes on account of my actions.