McCain!

I see your point, here we go and get involved in something and he's saying we ain't going to think about it in terms of getting uninvolved - but let's try to have some perspective. 2-trillion's a big number, but why not call it in cents instead of dollars and say 200-trillion? The unit loses its meaning at that level - the bearing it retains is confidence-in-the-dollar, to which it has added something the Euro will never have - ass-kicking power. And as for casualties, 50% more than in Clinton's peace? Considering what we've got to deal with that either wasn't a problem in Clinton's term or, more likely to my mind, was taking root then, that unit-value hasn't grown to the point of becoming meaningful.

It would take more than one hand to count the number of times I've explained to Republican-type friends why the Libertarian views on the war/defense, while superficially similar to that of some Dems, aren't naive or weak. The reason is like the old 'don't tread on me' (+ picture of a snake) concept - in a Libertarian-styled USA we'd do our own thing - there'd be no more half-hearted conflicts, just what we've got to do to stay in business and what we don't do - so if a threat were to arise we'd have the ferocity of single-mindedness. Less fighting, nothing to gain by screwing with us, more to lose.

That said, today, right here and now, blue-eyed soul that I am, I differ from my party. We're not ready to put it behind us like that. The reason is not that some folk are crazy enough to take a shot at us, it's that the possibility for them to do so exists within the scope of international politics/economy. I mean, they did screw with our national fabric a bit when they dropped the towers right? You see, international politics/economics/war are all about getting other people to do your thing, and we're at a disadvantage because we're not bigoted-up enough to take pride in **** like cheese and wallabies. A Libertarian government would short-out that dynamic just fine, but till then it's just a rewarding thing to do for some folk to try and square our vibe... In that sense, I think McCain's got the right idea - both in the sense of maximizing the benefit and minimizing risk - let them know that our policy is independent of anything they can do - if you give them nothing, they've got nothing.

I'm a problem solver - it's what I do - there's a zen to it, I mean, there's no such thing as a multi-step solution, one must create a reality in which the problem ceases to exist as such, otherwise you're just polishing a turd.

Obama's got the lead in the polls and he's running away like a rape-date with it. I knew there'd be a post-Hilly springboard effect, the airtime they got pounding on each other, McCain didn't play dirty with it, any attention is good attention. I'm not sure it'll play out this way either, there's a point where Bob Barr could get to the uninformed liberal constituency (that would be a fun way to lose, let Congress pick BHO), McCain might have more to gain from a VP, in the debates, say what you will, but my idea about where the advantage of substance/swagger lies gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Nonetheless the potentiality is real - no matter what happens one must conceive of these things - so what happens if the Dems are looking at a win in the fall?

I've resolved before if it's not close either way, and hereafter as well, that I'll tend to vote Libertarian or skip it - I mean, to my mind, apart from being a matter of principle, it's the most influential vote one can cast. Also as a matter of damage control - let BHO know who's thinking what.

So then thinking about the morning after - McCain loses, Obama wins and Barr makes a showing. What will have we have made our reality? Hillary's nursing history's greatest case of blue-balls as we speak, and soon an entire party, to a greater extent than has been the case in my lifetime will join her. I see McCain being cool with it, nigh-unto relieved if he loses, having answered the call to duty so many times already and since I don't think he's planning on enjoying the presidency as such, but it would be the third time and probably last time. Sat out W-Bush when in retrospect he'd clearly have done a better job. The world will see us take a different future over a hairy past. Votes for McCain will be counted as over-ruled, as opposed to LNC votes which might be taken under advisement by the incoming administration - correctly so, of course, to my mind - but with the effect perhaps only of obscuring Barack's irreconcilable shortcomings.

I say all that to say this - I've changed my battle plan - in such a manner others might find advisable. As of today, despite the LNC gaining steam and growing discrepancies between my ideas and his, McCain's got my vote no-matter what. We either win big or we loose big - damn it anyway, let it happen, I'm ready for it. The nation goes some way I ain't about again, nothing left to do, vote for the excellence I'd like to see in myself and which is the right-and-good in our national character. Vote my ass for an American hero, folk want to see it a different way, I can dig it. If that happens, I see there being failure - if so let it be unadulterated that we may learn from it, and palliated only by whatever segment votes for the fightin-man serving to keep the wolves scared off of the door till this blows over...

McCain -- Conservative, Maverick, or Flip-flopper?

If you're still trying to decide, maybe this chart will help.

From the intro to the graph on Minnesota Monitor: