Scott Brown is a good thing?

The election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts has been widely hailed as a victory of conservatism over the collectivist trend that exists in America. I say it is nothing of the sort.

This is just the same old two party setup that has led our country to the situation it is now, and lies at the heart of why there is a Libertarian Party.

The lesser of two evils? People are convinced that they have to use one of two parties to have any voice, when in reality thay have none with either. What have you gained?

We have to play a numbers game to win elections? Sure, go ahead and assume everybody else is stupid, and try and outwit them by voting for something you do not want.

He was against health care, so we are ahead? He wasn’t against health care, he was just against somebody else (not him) controling healthcare. He wrote the current state healthplan for Massachusetts known as “Romneycare.”

Posing naked is legal, so this shouldn’t be held against him? So is being easy, but that does not mean I would want a nude male model to lead my country. There are thousands of real heroes out there who are not so desperate for self aggrandizement, and would do a better job.

The major parties are experts at making you think this is the best you can get. It is, of course, nonsense.

Vote for what you want, not for what you are given.

Regards
Pete Blome