Then I wonder why it is that the "BushBots" are constantly called socialists?
BTW, I loved your post about your vote; it's one of the most honest, realistic posts I've ever seen on FR.
I'll take "It's because they're Socialists" for 200 Alex.
"Constantly" might be a stretch. But, I can certainly identify with those who mourn the weakening and tearing down of our Constitution at the hands of Democrats and Republicans alike (not to mention their SCOTUS appointees).
I can't help but wonder how we'd be ranting non-stop about Campaign Finance Reform and The Patriot Act if they'd been passed and signed into law by Democrats.
It's just that, after a while, it becomes obvious that there will be no real reform until things get bad enough, or the slippery slope gets steep enough. Until then, vilifying the Republicans and Bush as socialists and casting third-party protest votes will accomplish nothing other than perhaps help get Democrats elected.
It's all a matter of perspective. Some see the glass as 2/3 full, others as 4/5 empty. Once there's a big enough hole in the bottom and/or there's only a few drops left, people will wake up and do something. Consider that Al Gore was one robe short of counting and recounting chads until he could manufacture enough votes to win Florida and the presidency. If the decision had gone in his favor, I was prepared to fly the flag upside down (the distress signal) or burn it in my driveway. On the one hand, I'm glad the Constitution prevailed, if only barely. But, the slow march of socialism continues. Revolution will wait for a darker day. To ensure its arrival, Dems will 'Bork' any and every even marginally-conservative SCOTUS appointee Bush might have occasion to throw at them, no matter what race or gender. If he manages to get a Clarence Thomas past them, it will be only by the grace of God. Let's hope Bush has what it takes to appoint a Clarence Thomas.
(Thanks for the kind words. Don't let my lengthy reply discourage you from complimenting others. ;O)