Theories (Signifying Nothing: how does saying nothing at all become so loud?)

Monday, 25 October 2004

Theories

Greg Ransom writes:

STEVE CHAPMAN opposes the war and opposes the death penalty, so he’s voting Democrat for President for the first time in his life. He also quotes David Boaz of the CATO Institute, “Republicans wouldn’t give Kerry every bad thing he wants, and they do give Bush every bad thing he wants.” Many anti-war and pro- civil liberties libertarians are refusing to vote for Bush. A good many of these folks have always voted a straight Libertarian Party ticket. Now some are switching tickets for John Kerry. Passing strange. All I can figure is that more than a few became libertarians out of the nightmare of the Vietman experience, and now some are Coming Home to anti-war leader John Kerry. That, at least, is a first try at a plausible hypothesis. Let me know if you have a better one.

Well, if your choice is between two nanny-statist fucktards, but only one of them (in one’s mind) cares about civil liberties, I’d go for the pro-civil-liberties fucktard personally. At least, if I were confined to voting for a fucktard, or were the sort of person who used that word in casual conversation.

3 comments:

Any views expressed in these comments are solely those of their authors; they do not reflect the views of the authors of Signifying Nothing, unless attributed to one of us.

1. mungowitz wrote @ Mon, 25 Oct 2004, 2:42 pm CDT:

What a bizarre conclusion: that libertarians are anti-vietnamers who are coming home to Kerry.

For a Democrat, and his flying monkey soldiers full of life-arranger biles and thought police files to be a better choice than Bush, Bush must have REALLY SCREWED THE POOCH. Isn’t that a possible explanation for the libertarian move to Kerry? Like everyone else, Bush terrifies us.

As for “fucktard”: Chris, it won’t help. Even if you use words like this, your big ass is STILL gonna be chair as soon as you get tenure. And I am going to laugh at you.

2. Chris Lawrence wrote @ Mon, 25 Oct 2004, 4:39 pm CDT:

Well, I can’t say I was ever a fan of Vietnam personally, but then again I was born after Saigon fell, so what do I know? That said, as a son of someone who did serve in SE Asia, I find much of Kerry’s VVAW behavior deeply repulsive. If Kerry had behaved as honorably after coming home as most non-koolaid-drinkers think he did in Nam, he’d be wiping the floor with Bush today.

Lord, I am sick of this election. Can’t it just be over already, so I can start bitching about the winner (whoever Sandra Day decides it is)?

3. Jason Kuznicki wrote @ Tue, 26 Oct 2004, 7:47 am CDT:

It’s interesting that Ransom lists every good reason why libertarians should vote for Kerry—and then he pulls a bad one out of his ass, saying that this last one MUST be why.

I really don’t care about Vietnam. I was born well after it ended. I do, however, hope that one day I’ll live to see the end of the present war, however you choose to define it. I too have always voted Libertarian for president, but not this time around.

Comments are now closed on this post.