I've actually been avoiding the current Presidential contest this year which is a first for me. My lack of excitement about the whole thing can be evidenced by the fact that I nearly talked myself into not only voting in the Democratic primary but into actually voting for Dennis Kucinich as well! Well, I decided to remedy that problem during my days off from work and I have spent a great deal of time since Sunday browsing every resource I could come across concerning the 2004 election. The end result: I am now so unbelievably bored by the whole thing that I have discovered a new form of exciting entertainment -- discovering just how bored one human being can become before he slips into a state of catatonia. This incoming coma, I hope, will be studied by research scientists for years to come and hopefully will eventually become known as Kerry Paralysis.

Over the past couple of days, I have spent far too much time reading about the various exploits of John F. Kerry and I must admit that I am now feeling just a little bit brain-fried. I was no Al Gore fan but at least there was a discernible mission behind his Presidential campaign. Unfortunately, that mission happened to be Gore's own messiah complex but, and again I am not a fan of the former Vice President, there was no doubt that Gore sincerely believed that it was his destiny to save the world by getting elected President. If at times it seemed like Bush's main reason for running was to redeem his family name, at least that was a mission and not necessarily a pointless one when you consider that redeeming the Bushes also meant repudiating not only the policies of Bill Clinton but the self-destructive style he brought to the practice of American democracy. But Kerry -- has anyone asked this man why he's running for President other than the fact that he apparently doesn't have anything else left to do? Has anyone asked why Democrats are rallying to this man beyond the fact that he's not a Republican or, more specifically, a Bush? There's something disturbing about the fact that the only real reason John Kerry is currently a strong contender to lead the free world is that Howard Dean ended up making an ass out of himself for a few minutes in Iowa.

There's been a lot of speculation, as of late, on just what exactly it is that John Kerry stands for. A wise man would probably say that, if after 30 plus years on the public stage, a leader still doesn't stand for anything than that figure has probably surrendered his right to be a leader. Over the past weekend, after reading about his accident on the ski slopes and his attempts to bond with the common man through shopping for a better jock strap, I've come to the conclusion that just as Dean was the activist candidate, Lieberman the moderate candidate, Kucinich the peace candidate, and Sharpton the black candidate, Kerry is none other then the Muppet Candidate.

He seems real but just quite isn't.

The question I've been avoiding for far too long is who do I really support in 2004. Obviously, for me at least, Kerry is out of the question. It's not that I wouldn't ever vote for someone whose politics might differ from mine. After all, I was nearly a Republican for Kucinich but a vote for Kucinich would have been the equivalent of when, in my teenage years, I would skip study hall and hang out behind the high school, smoking Marlboro Reds and drinking cheap beer. You'd get a funny little buzz and spend the rest of the day feeling like a rebel and the real damage done would be minimal. Researching Kerry, you're left with the impression that the man's never had a funny little buzz in his life. Until recently, I was a very enthusiastic Bush supporter but as of late, I've started to worry that his administration -- like his father's -- has been drifting, randomly going from issue to issue with no real plan or destination in sight. I think that, in the days following 9-11, Bush was perhaps one of the greatest Presidents this nation will ever be lucky enough to know. I also think that a lot of that greatness is currently being squandered in the morass of Iraq (though anyone who says we didn't do the world a favor by toppling Hussein needs to get their head examined) and on pointless crusaders like the current moves against gay marriage.

Well, where do we go from there? Third parties? Well, third parties were all the rage for about eight years there, weren't they? Perot helped to elect Clinton in '92 and Nader certainly elected Bush in 2000. As for '96, the Reform Party was pretty much irrelevant but it was still a lot of fun watching Perot popping up like some sort of demonic little Leprechaun and screwing Richard Lamm, the amazingly annoying former Governor of Colorado, out of that party's Presidential nomination. So, third parties aren't totally irrelevant though anyone who thinks that any independent is going to be elected during our lifetime is truly fooling himself. So, how is the fringe looking for 2004?

Well, Ralph Nader's running again. This time, he's not even running as a Green but as a true independent. In short, he's running as just pure Ralph Nader. Of course, if Kerry is the kid who wouldn't smoke outside the high school, Nader's the kid who snitched on all the smokers and who made sure his hallway monitor sash was crisp and clean every single morning. So, forget about Ralph.

As for the once mighty Reform Party -- well, their relevance can be judged from the fact that there's a large movement in what is left of the party to convince Ralph Nader to come run on their ticket. Jesus Christ, how do you go from worshipping Ross Perot to nearly nominating Dick Lamm to rallying behind Pat Buchanan to courting Ralph Nader in only 12 years time!? The answer reveals why the Reform Party was doomed to fizzle out. It's a party full of frustrated politicians, of former Republicans and Democrats who were too flaky to make it in their original parties and who basically went off and formed their own social club. They're the Chess Club of American politics, linked not by any real ideology but instead by a sort of self-righteous bitterness that finds it's outlet by latching onto various demi-nerds, people who aren't cool enough to screw cheerleaders but have still managed to make it to a point where they can walk down the school hallway without getting their books slapped out of their hands -- the Ross Perots, the Pat Buchanans, and now, the Ralph Naders. In short, the Reform Party is currently a bunch of reformers who have no idea what exactly it is they're trying to reform.

Anyway, recent reports had Nader turning down the Reformers which means they'll probably end up nominating one of their state chairmen -- an 80 year-old guy named Ted Weill who seems well-meaning but is still basically just some 80 year-old guy with a lot of free time on his hands.

As for Nader's former home -- the Green Party! Yeah, everyone just seems to love the Green Party. They're like the kids who go spend their week wearing uniforms and studying catcheisms at an exclusive private school and then spend their weekends dressing in black, coating their eyes with dark mascara, and listening to Marilyn Manson. They're the party for people who want to change the real world without ever having to actually live in it. Anyway, there's a move in that party to draft Nader as well. If they can't convince Nader, they're party will probably end up nominating either David Cobb, a Texan who probably won't make much of a blip beyond giving the rest of America the chance to actually see what a Liberal Texan looks like, or just maybe Peter Camejo, the obscenely rich Marxist who some people noticed when he ran in last year's recall election in California. Camejo will apparently be California's favorite son candidate at the upcoming Green Convention which leads to the unavoidable question -- the Greens have favorite sons!? Anyway, a Camejo Campaign would be handicapped by the fact that he's an obscenely rich Marxist and Americans only vote for obscenely rich Marxists when they're Democrats.

Let's see -- who else is there? The Natural Law Party is a New Age party that appears to be some sort of weird conspiracy designed to unite the world under the rule of the Beatles' former spiritual guru. John Hagelin, the party's leader and perennial candidate, withdrew from the race early on and endorsed none other than Dennis Kucinich. There have been rumors that Kucinich might end up as the Natural Law's Presidential candidate. I don't think it'll happen but if it did -- would I be tempted once again to vote for Kucinich? Uhmmm, probably not. Much like the time I refused to cut (or comb) my hair for two years and spent most of my time locked in my dorm room, smoking pot and listening to Jim Morrison singing The End, Kucinich was a passing fad. Fun while it lasted but definitely over when it was over.

For those of you who think the U.S. constitution was designed to outlaw gay marriage, there's the Constitution Party. Formerly known as U.S. Taxpayers, this is the party that basically makes conservatives like myself cringe. They're everything that the national media claims the Republicans are. Right now, it looks as if the Constitution will be nominating -- notice a theme developing here? -- a state party chair that nobody's ever heard of but there's a chance that the nomination might go to Ray Moore, the former Alabama Supreme Court Justice who refused to take down the Ten Commandments. (Strange how Moore's actions were labeled the work of an ideological extremist yet all the Mayors across the nation performing illegal marriages -- regardless of whether they should be illegal or not -- are not...) I am kind of hoping that Moore does run and that the Constitution Party does become a minor factor this year if just to get the Republicans to back off this whole gay marriage fiasco...

That leaves the Libertarians. I am a dues-paying member of the Libertarian Party and, even though I couldn't give an exact count, I've probably voted for as many Libertarian candidates as I've voted for various Republicans over the years. But only once -- in 1992, the first Presidential campaign I was eligible to vote in -- have I ever voted Libertarian for President. (That, for all you trivia fans out there, candidate was Andre Marrou who, so far, I think is the only Alaskan to ever pop up on a national ballot.) I voted for Dole in '96 and G.W. Bush in 2000. Basically, I love the Libertarian Party. Judging strictly by political belief, the Libertarian Party is my natural home and, of all the "major" minor parties out there, the Libertarians probably have the best potential to actually become a major party at some point in the near future. However, the problem is just that. The Libertarians have had that potential for over thirty years now and they've squandered it on petty in-fighting. Instead of focusing on spreading their message of personal freedom, they're allowed themselves to get caught up on proving that they've read more Ayn Rand than the next guy. (And let me just say, as a Libertarian, that Ayn Rand is -- without a doubt -- one of the worst writers in recent literary history. It is true that Rand's original language was not English and I find that comforting as I'd hate to think anyone could write that badly in their native tongue. There -- I've been waiting four years to find an excuse to use that statement somewhere.) Mark Twain once said that he's be a Christian if it weren't for other Christians and I think the same thing can be said for many potential Libertarians.

Still, for all of my frustrations, the Libertarians might be getting my Presidential vote this year. The three main candidates -- Gary Nolan, Aaron Russo, and Michael Badnarik -- are all nicely inoffensive and I could see myself casting a ballot for either of them. Right now, my inclination is to support Aaron Russo for the nomination. Don't get me wrong -- I know that Aaron Russo will not be our next President but of all the candidates running, he seems like he'd be the strongest messenger. If the Libertarians can't win in 2004, then the real mission of this year's campaign should be to help the party grow, to help lay down the foundation on which the Libertarians can finally start to become the major player they should have become years ago. At the very least, Russo has the money, charisma, and support to at least play the role of spoiler in a close race and hopefully, much as the Greens have pushed the Democrats towards the left, help push the Republicans back towards a more Libertarian direction.

So, for what it is worth, I am endorsing Aaron Russo for the Libertarian Presidential nomination. I do this with the full knowledge that it'll probably make not a damn bit of a difference. I will also be honest enough to admit that I've had a poor track record when it comes to picking nominees. In '92, I cast my primary vote for Pat Buchanan (this was before Pat went nuts and, I should note, this was also during my previously mentioned long-haired, pothead phase so don't judge me to harshly). In '96, my candidate for the Republican nod was Indiana's competent but bland Sen. Richard Lugar who didn't even make it down to Texas. After Lugar dropped out, I switched to Steve Forbes (remember him?). In 2000, my nomination was like a groupie following Led Zeppelin in the '70s in that pretty much got traded from one guy to another for a good couple of months until the whole thing was over with. I started out as a supporter of U.S. Rep. John Kasich who dropped out after being a candidate for about an hour or two. I then went over to former Vice President Dan Quayle who decided he'd rather go hang out with John Kasich. Lamar Alexander, my endorsement shouted, how ya doing? Alexander actually had my vote for a while until he too dropped out a few months later (though I think he might have actually made it all the way to the first primary before giving up). Then, I was supporting Steve Forbes -- yet again -- for a few weeks before he dropped out and I finally ended up voting for Bush in the Republican primary largely because John McCain reminded me of a frustrated Jehovah's Witness, jamming his foot in the doorway and demanding to know why you wouldn't let him save your soul from damnation. And of course this year -- well, the less the whole Kucinich thing is brought up the better.

So, anyway --

Congratulations, Aaron Russo! You've won the highly coveted Jeffrey Paul Ellis Presidential Endorsement for 2004!

To quote Ian McShane in the ludicrously profane new HBO series Deadwood, run for your fucking life.  ¶ 11:20 PM