Words of self-effaced wisdom from Penn Jillette
While I don't agree with a lot of his politics (he's a way beyond reason libertarian, far more than I can take) I couldn't agree more with the sentiment. I'm tired of participating in a broken system and rewarding the same mediocrity and corruption.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 |
This page contains a single entry by ish published on October 16, 2008 4:45 PM.
Canada's Third National Anthem? was the previous entry in this blog.
Obligatory Election Entry is the next entry in this blog.
Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.
Wow that was rambling and entertaining.
Really you should have posted this along with the article on why you shouldn't vote.
http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/10/05/new-on-free-will-polluting-the-polls-will-jason-brennan/
His point though on folks purposefully voting 3rd party is not a valid point either. It is equal to voting against someone as if you are not voting for a candidate that you would like to see in the white house, then you really are throwing you voice away.
Probably could stand on my soap box for quite a while but then I would be abusing your blog instead of abusing my own. But suffice it to say, he should relax before ranting as he could have gotten a point across.
1) Don't vote against a party, it doesn't work for the democratic system
2) Vote 3rd party cause the two we have are really stinking it up.
3) Make sure you vote for the person you actually want to vote for based on the platforms they stand for.
Well, I don't think he's really attempting to be well planned and informative. He readily acknowledges his role as "the Nut viewpoint" and so rambling and entertaining seems like exactly what he is going for.
I can see an argument by which voting against the two parties is different from voting against a specific candidate, precisely because of how consumed our system is by the two-party system. But it certainly is an argument and not a given, so your point is certainly valid.
Personally, the major thought his rant put me on is that there *should* be an option to vote against candidates. So one could really vote "anyone but Bush", or vote NOT Obama NOT McCain.