[extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 -objectivereview?]
Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks
dwish at indco.net
Sun Aug 15 18:37:43 UTC 2004
This forum seems in general to support the Kerry camp. This is understanding
because most in the group seek "radical" changes in the way we live our
lives in the future. I also seek to change the world in which we live, but
at the same time keep a strong rear view on the past. I don't care for the
"Fear" agenda that Bush spreads, but I can't with a clear mind vote for
Kerry either. I am a realist in that I know the next President of this great
country will be one of these men. Also want scares me more is that the next
Democratic rep. to run after this election will be Hillary and Obama which
is sooooooo much scarier than Bush or Kerry. So that means my vote will be
best counted by voting for someone who will support most of my views even if
I disagree with some. That brings me to the point that the Kerry is just a
"Feel Good" guy that if anything goes wring then they just need a hug. That
scares me. We are facing a group of Muslim men ages 18-25 that have been
taught to hate America since they were born. The issue truly rests in that
if we tuck tail and run out of Iraq that we lose far more than the men we
have lost already. Our country will be a target for anyone that needs their
agenda passed to just bomb a church or building and we will give them what
they want to not make anyone mad. That is the Kerry camp. Appeasement never
works. If as transhumanist, futurist, and mad scientists we should not
fighting for truth and understanding through education, legislation, and
global information and not be wondering who maybe offended or pissed off. To
live in fear is to not live at all. This tone seems to sound in the Bush
camp. I can seem to find if Kerry has an opinion at all or if it is just
"what do you want to hear and I'll tell you that". I want a man of passion
about his principals. That is not the flip flop Kerry camp.
System Engineer & Programmer
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead
where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 11:37 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
--- Brent Neal <brentn at freeshell.org> wrote:
> (8/15/04 13:29) Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> >Brent Neal:
> >> I personally intend to cast votes based on pure spite in several
> >> elections just for this reason.
> >Sounds like game theory tit for tat.
> Hadn't thought of it that way, but I think that you may be right.
Which still doesn't demonstrate any evidence of voting rationally. Tit
for tat is decidedly an irrational, instinctual, strategy.
> I call it voting on the principle of least incompetence. I made the
> mistake in 2000 of voting for Harry Browne, the Libertarian
> candidate, because the thought of voting for an abject moron like
> Bush was morally repugnant (and because anyone that dumb must have
> smart handlers that'd be running the show, and I figured correctly
> that those handlers would be the same people that were in power
> during his father's presidency.) and voting Democrat was something I
> wasn't prepared to do.
> So this time around, I'm voting "against someone" instead of "for a
> set of principles." And honestly, I don't see any other way at this
> point to prevent the US from turning into a complete hell-hole. Kerry
> may be just as spineless as any other career politician, but there is
> a possibility that he may be 'educatable.' So sayeth John Perry
> Barlow, at least. (c.f.
> <http://www.reason.com/0408/fe.bd.john.shtml>) Actually, I think
> that interview pretty much sums up why libertarians of any stripe
> should not be voting for BushCo. ("I donb
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3886 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the extropy-chat