This is a very difficult question. I depends on what you hold most important.

Personal freedom or non-aggression?

Non-Aggression: Voting is like two wolves and one sheep deciding what to eat?

If non-aggression is your primary goal in freedom, then don’t vote. Voting by its very nature is mob rule, and is violence. A mob decides I need to pay more in taxes, I decide to keep my money, the representatives of the mob send goons to extort it from me, steal my property, and finally jail or kill me; depending on how far I resist my mob elected enslavement.

Personal Freedom: I own myself, and as such, I don’t recognize other people’s claim of ownership on me.

If your goal is personal freedom, then working within the electoral system, to dismantle it from the inside out may be your best choice. Ron Paul, who wanted to bring the government down to its smallest constitutional unit was the best example.

Since this time we have MOSTLY constitutional leaning politicians stepping up to bat:

• Rand Paul – I shared an article from Anti-Media on him. Since this time, I have gone through and listened and reviewed his inconsistencies. I have decided that he isn’t as inconsistent as I thought, but his stance is such that he allowed himself to dance some issues. Israel is the top one. Once he was against giving them money, then next time he is for giving them money. I would like to remind him, that isn’t his money, and we are in debt. (FYI: Even I saw the Bernie Sanders interview as BS mud slinging. So I gave him no credit but to recognize that he knows how to show up on the small screen.)
• Justin Amash – Not running, but has turned out to be a great open book politician.
• Ted Cruz – Running but shouldn’t
• Trey Gowdy – Not running
• There are democrats that belong on this list, but I don’t pay enough attention to politics to know them. The only reason I know of the 4 people above is because of my Republican leaning family and friends.

What to do?

So this is the big question. What is more important to me, Freedom, or Non-Aggression? I am a peacenik by nature. Meaning that I hate human on human violence except in self defense. There is a reason that I come in defense of Atheists, Non-Christian Theists, Homeless, and Homosexuals. They don’t deserve to have their lives violated by unjustified violence, just as we all don’t. I also don’t believe that non-victim crimes are actually crimes. Meaning that if someone wants to sell sex, or take drugs, it isn’t the job of the government to jail them.

If a person is an addict, treat the addiction, not jail the addict. If a person is selling sex, see if you can entice them into a non-sex industry job by education, and compassion.

If I don’t want gay sex, same sex marriage, prostitution, or drug abuse, then I won’t have gay sex, marry someone of the same sex, pay for sex, or take a drug to the point of it being an abuse. Problem solved. There is no need for this to be a law. But the flip side of that is that I would also like to have the opportunity do business with anyone who wants to do business with me, or refuse to do business with them, if they represent something that I don’t want to do business with. We don’t need laws for this. We have markets and reputation.

So, if I vote for someone, it must be for the explicit reason to shrink government. As soon as  that person expands government, then this is a failed experiment. If I were to run for president, then again it would be to shrink government, and every expansion would be a failure on my behalf.

So I am torn. Freedom! or Non-Aggression!

IF I CAN GET A ONE ON ONE INTERVIEW WITH RAND PAUL, THEN I MAY SET MY POSITION FINALLY.