Jeff Durbin

When I read the book, I wanted to 'do' Dagny. When I first saw Jolie in a movie, I wanted to 'do' her too. Give her the role and stop being picky!

People have been throwing out Condi Rice quite a bit even though the original question stipulated "realistically". Someone who has never run for ANYTHING cannot be considered realistic for the Presidency. What about Mitt Romney? Ehrlich isn't all that realistic but Romney has pretty much thrown his hat in the ring. There are a lot of reasons to believe that he can at least run a credible campaign.

Whoaaaah, uninformed dude! There isn't any law anywhere in this country banning stem cell research!!!!! The Left wants taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research. Bush has said that it is wrong to use federal funding on 'new' lines. This isn't about stem cell research - it's about pork barrel politics. Don't buy into the lies of the left on the basic facts. It prevents you from reaching the correct answer. To address the basic question asked, I am not sure who I support. They're all various forms of garbage. I would probably prefer Frist even though I know he won't slow the increase in government spending any more than what Bush has done (none).

A few points: 1) Although there was a reference to the Free State Project (20,000 Libertarians and/or Objectivists and/or freedom-loving people moving to New Hampshire to basically take over the state government and move it in the direction of freedom) no one really followed up on it. I think there is some merit to the idea but there are significant obstacles as well. The truth be told, I know plenty of Libertarians or Objectivists in the Socialist state of California that are not willing to leave CA for NH. What does that say? 2) I tend to agree with Adriana (and not exclusively because of the attractive photo). One strategy is to buy an island and/or enough of us emigrate to a small nation to enable us to assume control of the government and move it to an objectivist/Libertarian ideal. Of course, that takes money. I think the possibility of a hugely successful individual doing it is more likely than some mass movement of like-minded individuals (see my caveeat in #1 above). I need to figure out how to become a billionaire and make it happen. 3) What about emigrating to a relatively 'free' nation like Singapore, Ireland or one of the eastern European nations and try to influence their governments to keep adhering to free market policies? One of the impetuses of the EU Constitution movement is that countries like France and Germany are tired of trying to compete with low-tax Ireland and the Eastern European nations. Since the Eastern European nations are enjoying success with their current strategy, trying to reinforce the virtuous policies would not be as difficult as creating a free nation to begin with. I have been to Singapore twice and I would very much enjoy living there. 2005_Index_Overview_Release.doc

I met Chris at the 1988 Republican convention (yes, I realize the fact that I attended the convention in and of itself makes me suspect). I have been to some of his fundraisers in the past 17 years. He's a solid pro-markets (not pro-business) Congressman. You guys probably will find ways to nitpick him (such as the pork for the missions) but unfortunately that is what politicians do. Yeah, it would be great if they did a lot less of it. I look at the political game as a game of possibilities. Bush's nominations of Cox and Janice Rogers Brown push the envelope in terms of possibilities and they should be hailed by members of this forum. It is a strategy of pursuing incremental gains that will advance the cause of liberty just as the Left has used the same incremental strategy in the 20th century to advance the cause of statism. I was in a conversation yesterday with a buddy regarding Chris's nomination and we both agreed that it will inevitably make him a stronger candidate to run for Boxer's seat in 2010 or Feinstein's seat in 2012 (assuming she gets reelected in 2006). He would be a lot better than either of them.