What Libertarianism Lacks

I know, I know, most everyone who's ever read my blog thinks I'm an anarcho-syndicalist. And I will vote for Loretta Nall, the Liberetarian candidate, for governor when I vote Tuesday.

I will vote for her because not only is she the best candidate for the job, but also she represents the only party actually concerned with the real issues facing real people. She talks about prison reform, and education, and ending the senseless prosecution of marijuana smokers. She has real ideas about how to fit this shit together. She has an actual VISION of what the future could be like, if we'd just vote her in.

But there are no Libertarian candidates running in any other race I'm voting on on Tuesday. Aty least, I don't think there are. You'd think that my interest in Ms. Nall's candidacy (and look, y'all, Bob Riley isn't really all that bad compared to what we have faced in the past) would have sparked some sort of comminique from some Alabama Libertarian flunkie somewhere. You'd think they would at least see the sense in ACTING like a normal political party during election season.

That's not me pleading for attention (READ MY BLOG, BITCHES.). That's me observing that having staffers that sat down and did frequent search-engine sweeps and responded appropriately could possibly grow the fucking party from irrelevance to, uh...relevance.

Loretta is screaming into the void.

She's right, she's absofuckintively right about a preponderence of issues, and I sense that she's actually willing to listen to reasoned discussion about the balance of the issues. What a radical concept. Common sense.

But I can't vote for common sense, I can only vote for a Democrat.