Endorses What's-His-Name, The Libertarian, For President

Editorial written by James Baughn on Thursday, October 23, 2008

from the bet-you-didn't-expect-that dept.

In previous years, we've held our noses and voted for the lesser evil.

But this year? Both candidates suck equally.

Here we have one candidate who is licking his chops for the opportunity to engage in socialist wealth redistribution.

And then we have Barack Obama. This is not much of a choice.

Instead, would like to officially endorse, uh, you know, the guy nobody has heard about, the token Libertarian candidate. He's the best choice, whatever his name is.

Sure, voting for a third-party candidate is mathematically the equivalent of throwing your vote away. But then again, voting for a Democrat or a Republican has, in the grand scheme of things, about the same impact. Just ask anybody who voted for George Dubya -- twice.

You could vote for Obama ("change") or McCain ("change, but not as much"). Personally, I don't care about change, I want progress. If you vote for change without progress, you're throwing your vote away.

The advantage of voting for a third-party candidate is that you will always have the smug satisfaction of knowing that you did not contribute to whatever disasters were caused by the Democrat or Republican winner. When McCain's "Bailout For Billionaires With Too Many Houses To Count" plan screws over the middle class, or when Obama's "Rich People Who Make More Than Minimum Wage Must Pay More Taxes" plan screws over the middle class, you'll be able to make a fortune (before taxes) selling "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For That Guy You Didn't Know About" bumper stickers.

So this November 4th, recommends that you throw away your vote in style by voting for the Libertarian guy.