>Expertise, you KNOW you're always welcome
>at our table, but damn,
>man, sometimes you just talk
>out yer... you know...

It's funny how noone has yet to fully dispute my statements however. oh well....

>Why Nader gets more attention?
>There's a reason for that.
> He's the only 50
>states candidate.......

Hold right there....to speak technically, Nader is not on every state ballot. There are only 3 candidates that are actually on every ballot....Gore, Bush.......and Browne. Continue...

that has any
>activist history, or who has
>ever done anything besides blow
>hot air (props to Al
>for his book, but what
>has he REALLY done besides
>be born to an afluent
>family).
>Buchannon
>is a joke, Brown can
>be an ASS sometimes (ever
>listen to him speak?) which
>destroys credibility, Hagelin is a
>nice professor with no public
>appeal and no action, etc.
>etc. etc.

Be real for a second here....you think the majority of the voters even KNOW what Brown or Hagelin even looks like? And of course those are your opinions, which aren't even close to the opinions of the voting public. Therefore Nader's just known by his consumer advocate stance, so they tend to give him camera time.

>Why Nader challenges Bush and Gore:
> challenging piss-ant third party
>candidates IS "playing along" 'cause
>third party candidates are supposed
>to play nice together.

They are? That's a new one. In that case Browne isn't "playing nice" because he has openly criticized both Nader and Buchanan on several occasions.

>If you are going to break
>the duopoly you must fight
>the duopoly--not others against it.

There is a difference in between making yourself a candidate and making yourself a third-party advocate. I think those guys, at least Browne, would actually like to become president. I don't think they are in there for the purpose of simply opening up the elections.

>The key to breaking the duopoly
>is political alliance. All
>"third" parties must unite sworn
>to undo government controls mandating
>the duopoly.

This is an election, not an alliance.

>The government is not bipartisan because
>we don't vote for other
>cats--there are currently many non-partisan,
>and other-party cats in elected
>positions.
>
>The US government, and Pennsylvania state
>government are designed for TWO
>(2) parties. Their Standing
>Rules, and their Rules of
>Procedure, and their designs are
>specifically created for two parties.
> Republican and Democrat.
>Seats on committees are assigned
>by these two parties--not by
>the chair alone, not by
>vote, not by first come
>first serve, not by a
>committee--NOTHING.

ummm I suggest you check out your democratic governments. Most of those are ruled by one major party. There may be several candidates in the elections, sure, but the winning party usually has control of the government.
Not to mention that it's pretty safe to say the US and Penn govts consists of mostly people from those two parties anyway. Therefore it wouldn't make any sense to appoint people that aren't in your party and are against the party platform. What should be the alternative?

>This is done because back in
>the day, it was two
>parties fighting for a monopoly.
> Now, they're sharing a
>duopoly. That's a step
>forward, yes... but for 1800's.
> A positive step for
>the 1800's was also letting
>cats sleep in the big
>house, but does that mean
>shit today?

Actually the 1800's had more involvement of political parties than now. At times, it wasn't just two parties, it was more like 5.


"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship." - Alexander Tyler

"In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other." -Voltaire

"The assumption that spending more of the taxpayer's money will make things better has survived all kinds of evidence that it has made things worse. The black family- which survived slavery, discrimination, poverty, wars and depressions- began to come apart as the federal government moved in with its well-financed programs to "help." - Thomas Sowell

"Life is insensitive, and the truth can be highly offensive. To hide from either is to hide from the reality of life. Take pride in the fact that I am an equal opportunity offender. You today, someone else tomorrow. You have no constitutional right not to be offended." - Neal Boortz

Some of you still think America's a
democracy. Lemme break it down for
ya...

* Democracy:  Three wolves and a sheep
vote on the dinner menu.
* Democratically Elected Republic: Three
wolves and 2 sheep vote on which sheep's
for dinner. 
* Constitutional Republic: The eating of
mutton is forbidden by law, and the
sheep are armed.

The United States is a CONSTITUTIONAL
REPUBLIC. Not a democracy.

Yes....I am a PROUD Black Libertarian Conservative.