The American Guesser

From Newsday.com:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – A high school newspaper in California was disbanded after it published a front-page photo of a student burning an American flag, triggering criticism that the administration was stifling free expression.

Shasta High School Principal Milan Woollard said the school year’s final issue of the student-run Shasta High Volcano was embarrassing.

“The paper’s done,” Woollard told the Record Searchlight newspaper of Redding. “There is not going to be a school newspaper next year.”

This is what happens when you let kids actually read their civics textbooks. They learn all sort of uncomfortable concepts, such as the one that says they have to right to an opinion, especially if the opinion, if expressed, might cause the principal to have to answer a few phone calls.

A Portland, Ore., mom is all upset because her precious little snowflake isn’t being forced to recite the Pledge of Allegiance at a promotion ceremony:

“I was sad,” said parent Briana Reese. “The flag was sitting up there, you know. Two of the kids went up and they said ‘Everybody rise,’ and we rose, and I thought for just a second ‘Oh yeah, we’re going to put our hands on our hearts and we’re going to salute the flag’ – but no.”

Reese had heard that the principal planned to take the pledge out of the ceremony.

“I think that’s what they should be doing – telling kids you should be pledging your allegiance to this country,” Reese said. “This is a great country. You’re here for a reason.”

The pledge was instead replaced with a singing version of the preamble to the Constitution.

Kudos to the principal for getting it. The pledge is nothing more than a blind loyalty oath to a piece of cloth that symbolizes a nation. And thanks to tinkering over the years, it’s been turned into a form of state-mandated prayer. At least this kids are being exposed to the idea that the United States is a nation governed by laws and that the people have rights.

Conservatives and liberals like the pledge, but don’t have really warm feelings for the Constitution because, when properly followed, it tends to get in the way of whatever flavor of Nanny State nonsense they want to foist on the public.

I’ve never decided who I am going to vote for in the upcoming election. I see the good and bad in both Obama and McCain. There was no way in Hell I would vote for a bastard like Ron Paul — he polluted the Libertarian Party with a bunch of white supremacist rationalizations.

The question that I guess I’ve been asking myself is this: Can I, a guy who arrived at libertarianism because the Democratic Party wasn’t protecting civil liberties anymore, vote for a guy who arrived at libertarianism because the Republican Party was letting him down on other issues?

I think I might have an answer:

Q: How will Congressman Barr’s Campaign differ from that of Dr. Paul’s?

A: It will still retain the philosophical core of Ron Paul’s message, while making better political calculations and compromises where needed to advance the candidacy. For example – the issue of donations from white supremacists that plagued the Paul Campaign came up this week in the Barr Campaign. Congressman Barr chose to not accept their donations rather than give a philosophical argument about why he should not return the donation – as Ron Paul did. Point being, Bob Barr knows how to play politics and knows when to stand firm and when to compromise. By doing so Bob Barr will be able to lend political credibility to our ideas and thus create an environment where they can be spread much deeper into mainstream America. Bob Barr’s campaign will also be run by professionals. Ross Perot’s campaign manager is going to be Bob Barr’s campaign manager. Expect 48-51 state ballot access.

More thinking and research is needed, I think.

Via Oregon Live”

The newest candidate in Oregon’s U.S. Senate race is a former Republican who once campaigned for Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and now sounds like he’s channeling Ron Paul.

Dave Brownlow, who received the Constitution Party nomination this weekend, could attract conservatives disaffected with Smith.

Yep. That’s all a “third party” candidate is good for, swiping votes away from the legitimate candidates.

I’m NOT a Green, but I favor ballot access for all. That way, the voters decide. But Illinois’ Big Two parties are scared to death of letting voters have that choice. So they keep kicking alternatives off the ballot. Case in point, from Ballot Access News.

On June 9, Illinois elections officials removed four Green Party nominees from the November ballot. They are Iain Abernathy in the 8th district, David Kalbfleisch in the 10th district, Robert Hill in the 14th district, and Troy Dennis in the 17th district. All four districts are fairly competitive between the two major parties, and all four Greens had been nominated by party meeting after the February primary was over.

Illinois regulates political parties to a great extent. The Green Party followed state law, but it supplemented state law with its own Bylaws, especially in cases in which no Greens had run for party office in the February primary in certain counties. It is not clear if the Green Party will go to court to fight for these nominees. But case law, more and more every year, establishes the right of political parties to control their own nominations process.

Because, as you know, society will grind to a halt if counties were forced to pay to have one or two extra candidates appear on the ballot. Horrors!

Whatever you say, commissars.

Via The Washington Times:

Tom DeLay will vote for John McCain but the former House Republican leader said his wife, Christine, is planning to vote for Libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr.

“I’m trying to convince my wife not to do that,” the Texas Republican told editors and reporters at The Washington Times on Friday. “She said it publicly yesterday.”

Mr. Barr’s candidacy is an issue conservatives appear to be grappling with since he won the Libertarian party’s nomination on the sixth ballot at their May 25 convention in Denver. Early polls suggest Mr. Barr could draw small but significant support in key states such as Georgia and North Carolina, potentially complicating the electoral picture for Mr. McCain, Republicans’ presumed presidential nominee.

“Potentially complicating the electoral picture” … that’s one way to describe it.

Listen folks, your vote doesn’t BELONG to either one of the Big Two parties. It’s yours, and you can use it to vote for whomever you want. If more people voted for the person they really wanted to get the job this nation would be better off. But we’ve let the parties and the press brainwash us into voting for candidate A because heaven help us is Candidate B wins. The fact is that Candidates A and B, while different, are pretty damn close.

Myself, I can’t get to enthused about Barr’s libertarianism, considering how focused he was on Bill Clinton’s Penis. There were good reasons to impeach Clinton (lying under oath at the head of the list). But Barr was focused on the sex part during who impeachment mess. It left me with a bad taste in my mouth.

*ahem*

Hat tip to Third Party Watch.