[Urbane Guerrilla]

I don't support GW and I prefer liberty to material comfort.

Am I to understand you believe Bush to be a fascist? I've studied fascism, and nothing Bush does can honestly be mistaken for fascism. The people who claim the Bush Administration is fascistically or otherwise attacking civil liberties are people who are first and last anti-Bush, and not visibly pro anything. These are only civil libertarians at those times it looks good -- a most unreasonably distant second in their scheme of priorities. A great many of these people are toetag Democrats, making a religion out of their political affiliations. This is a very grave error, as the example of the Communists, who did the same thing, shows us. The Dems get no support from me until they quit fucking up like this. Upwards of fifteen years and counting, now...

There was a recent President who clearly leaned toward fascistic measures, as evinced by the kind of law his Administration made and the actions it took, viz., the Omnibus Crime Bill of 1994, the Communications Decency Act, the suborning of the entire Department of Justice into making its top priority running interference for the Clintons, and the browbeating of Smith & Wesson into signing off on a disadvantageous agreement on firearms manufacture, fortunately now moot. His name is William Jefferson Clinton, Democrat, and I am pleased to report I always voted against him. He was, however, annoyingly good at fooling enough of the electorate to stay in office.

You cannot force other people to be free. . .

It amazes me just how many people cannot believe I understand this point! Will you all kindly take it as read that I do? I grow impatient with your seemingly deliberate noncomprehension. For what seems like the sixth time, addressed to those who for their own stupid reasons will not listen, where the use of force comes in is in the removal of the obstacle to democracy's development presented by the forces of totalitarianism, all the way from the top man-on-horseback to the most junior lackey's lackey. The removal of the slavemakers and their antidemocracy program is all I expect the use of force to do. I can make it no plainer.

Have Iraq's slavemakers, in their campaign to return to their previous position of power and privilege, actually dented Iraqis' commitment to having a democracy, for all their car bombings, for all their dicked and dickless suiciders? I think the Iraqis are more committed to getting their democracy than Griff is. Good thing!

Then, in the absence of the slaveminded slavemakers' threat, you have a free field to bring up democracy. Humans are capable of self-governance, whether or not they've been recently in the habit. This, Griff, is a point you never seem to understand -- or else don't have any faith in, as the pessimistic tone of your comments indicates. Given this lacuna in your philosophy, how is it you call yourself a libertarian? Libertarianism is all about self-governance, is it not? Is this somehow only the exclusive property of American citizens? I don't see it that way.

Neither does PNAC, come to that: their whole thrust is that a world with markedly fewer autarchies, dictatorships, and despotic oligarchies and many more representative governments would be a world much more secure, and having much more in the way of mutual, common interests with mature republics like the United States. Given that, the next question is how do we get from a world full of autarchies et cetera to that goal? And if there's anything not to like in that goal, I haven't seen it. The ones who squawk about it all seem at bottom to be leftists of the most totalitarian stripe. Well, any idiot can complain, and most of them do. The action cannot make them any smarter.

. . .and growing our government's power over the individual does not make us more free.

I am satisfied of two things: that GWB's instinct is libertarian, and that Clinton's instinct is statist and socialist. Clinton did a good deal more growing of power than GWB has ever done. I can clearly see that the civil-wrongs portions of the USA PATRIOT Act are being rolled back under court challenges, legislative amendments, and such. Slowly, to be sure, but this is to be encouraged. Keep your legislators doing this -- they're supposed to be your representative and your senators, right? What will be left in the end will be more efficient coordination of American intelligence agencies, and expansion of what the intel community calls "consumers" -- of their product and analysis. The disconnects exposed by the 9/11 Commission's work are being rethought, in view of the government's basic mandate to protect the citizens and nation.

We may even be civil to one another if this war ever ends.

A consummation devoutly to be wish'd. We can always start practicing up.