>> The reason no one is mentioning the views of either Badnarik or Nader
>> is because their views matters no more than any of us on this board.

Practically speaking, of course, you are exactly right about that, Paul. It is, nevertheless, unfortunate. Remember that the Republican Party began as a third party movement in 1854 as an alternative to the then dominant Democrats and Whigs.

>> To go further, I'd venture to say that more people
>> know who you are than who Badnarik is.

That's probably true here on the ChipBoard.
I hope not otherwise ----- that would be truly frightening!

>> And in conclusion, it matters little what any of the candidates say about any social
>> issues if we don't have a country anymore. This is the first election that I can think
>> of that centers around one issue -- which is the perpetual existence of America.

Actually, you missed on this one by at least one election and 144 years. I think it's fair to say that the election of 1860 "centered" around the continued existence of the country -- and in a much more fundamental way than might be said of this election.

Furthermore, I think it is hyperbole to imply, as you have, that the continued existence of our country depends on whether George Bush or John Kerry wins this election. This is a "bogeyman" argument which vastly overrates the power of the president and vastly underestimates the will of the other 300 million people in this country.

>> Immaterial if you think our going to war with
>> the radicals were just or not, it was done.

I agree with the decision to go after international terrorists in Afghanistan (or elsewhere, for that matter). I disagree with the decision to invade Iraq. Nevertheless, as was told to Bush before the invasion (I think by Colin Powell), "if you break it, you own it". We now have to develop (because we certainly don't have one yet) an effective plan for dealing with the future of Iraq. I'm not at all sure Kerry can do this. I know without a doubt that Bush cannot, because he's had three years to do so and hasn't yet.

>> Now it is important to vote for the man who you believe will save
>> our nation - who is not afraid to go it alone to keep America safe.

I don't think for a minute that a willingness to "go it alone" is a virtue in today's world -- or that the election of John Kerry will doom us to national extinction. And frankly, even Dubya doesn't think that it's good to "go it alone" (ergo, the "coalition of the willing").

>> If you need help in deciding, just ask the opinion of the Arab
>> nations, France, Germany and Russia who they would like
>> to see as our president and vote the opposite.

I also doubt that the answer to your question from all of the Arab countries, France, German and Russia would necessarily be the same. Certainly, a significant number of the Arab nations would prefer to see Bush re-elected. After what happened recently, I'm not so sure where the Russians stand anymore, either.

>> Leaving in a few minutes for Reno, so I won't
>> be able to respond. Just my humble opinion.

What, you never coming back??

Good luck and have a good time. Can't make this show myself. ----- jim o\-S