Since Aug 6, 2004
As of August of 2008, I'm in Jacksonville, permanently.
Tallahassee is pretty, but a liberal majority voting county (Leon). I entered it as a kid that agreed with the Anarcho-Left, never a serious activist, but definitely self-identifying as such. 9/11 was the wakeup call. I guess a lot of other lefties slept in by ripping out the power cord. After 9/11 and seeing their reactions up close, I want nothing to do with these ... scumbags. Because, after a long hard look at how blind and sometimes violent the rest of the world can be, yes, this is undoubtedly the best country in the world. Just my luck, I got to have the honor of being born in it!
It'll never be the utopia the far-left wants it to be, and thankfully so. Maybe there are some good misguided hearts amongst them, but regardless, they need to wake up and realize the people trying to kill Americans don't make political distinctions, we're all targets. In this sort of world, "Anarchy and Peace", "non-violent reponses" are ineffective, or rather, deadly to us all if we embraced them on a large scale. The people that murdered our citizens and threw down the gauntlet to our nation need to be ruthlessly smashed. Nothing else will likely suffice, because these people aren't doing this reluctantly, they do so with a lust for our blood.
On the subject of anarchists, they're very left-driven more than anarchy-driven, historically as well (the spanish CNT being swallowed up by the Communists during the Spanish Civil War.). The commies reach out to them all the time to find new recruits. A lot of them also insist that anarcho-capitalists aren't real anarchists, because they would keep in place "half of the machinery of oppression." That's incredibly silly, IMHO (they're quite purist in that respect) as it's not capitalism per se that destroys the human spirit, rather people abusing it (again, IMHO). Socialism, even in somewhat "benign" forms in Sweden and Britain (many others), makes for a crawling society. France and Germany are both big fans of it (makes you wonder why we bothered keeping the Russkies out of their yards, huh?), but they have massive unemploment right now. Despite all the problems we have to deal with, we're at 5.5ish unemployment (October 04). For all their claims that capitalism relies on keeping people poor by unemployment, it's actually socialism that does this. It also needs an outside vibrant capitalist country to keep afloat (see China). Makes you wonder what a world without any of those existed, but their model was in place. For any faults, Capitalism is the only system that allows for individual freedom and for "the people" that socialists (of any stripe) claim to fight for to have some power in a meritocratic fashion. Brown-nosers that win in a socialist environment can't survive in this sort of system. Another huge problem I have with these far-lefties is their desire to make America look like other countries, instead of what the founders intended it to look like. What other country in the world enshrines the right to bear arms in its constitution? What other country has a huge percentage of people insisting upon capitalism and fighting malignant socialism inside and outside its borders? And yet, is run by us, for us, designed by people far more intelligent than leftists give them credit for. Should the dead ever rise for a brief period, I imagine the Founders would spend some time kicking Karl Marx's ass for concoting such a horses*** ideology. Rightfully so, it's authoritarian constructs have no business inside a clasically liberal society such as ours (think Locke, not current Dems).
I'm for Bush this round, and will probably stick with the Republicans. I'm registered Independent, I'm something of a single issue voter: pro-gun, no-compromise, "from my cold dead hands" kinda guy. In general I lean Libertarian, except for the "no-border" policy and their recent "no-war" turn.
Basically, I support the Libertarians positions on the drug war and the 2nd amendment. Their economic policies I generally support as well (free market, try not to mess with it unless you absolutely must.) An open boarder isn't a good idea, too many people that are trying to kill us would get in.
But they don't take terror seriously. Bush does, despite any moments of "sensitivity." Cox and Forkum made an excellent point about this a while ago, that when Kerry said "I'd fight a more sensitive war on terror," they were shocked. In their opinion, Bush was too worried about being insensitive, that he let a bunch of islamist assholes that think pretty much exactly like Al-Qaeda hang out in a shrine with impunity, instead of smashing them and winning their hearts and minds by going for the testicles. These folks aren't playing patty-cake with us, we need to smash them relentlessly. When you say you're going to do exactly that, but pullout for negotiations every minute, you send a bad message. For Kerry to say he'd be even MORE sensitive, it makes me wonder if he'd require soldiers to use pepper spray only. At the end of the day, Bush's approach might turn out to be right, or maybe wrong, but I know damn well sending a signal of capitulation by electing Kerry would be a suicidal idea.
11/8/06: B.O.H.I.C.A. - Bend over, here it comes again :P