What always strikes me as odd in this particular chapter of American politics is how many people seem to be arguing what amounts to nearly the same thing. I understand what a tyrannical government can do, but not all hands-on governments are tyrannical or actually all that interfering. (The government where I live, Finland, would be an example of one that regulates a great deal of public life, and this is seen as a benefit, not a drawback. It's coupled, however, with a very low corruption rate.)

From where I stand, I imagine that giving policy its freedom (which, in American capitalism, means in the hands of the free market) can be just as disastrous and wing-clipping as a bad, heavy-handed government. The difference being that voting is done with one's wallet. I trust CEOs and lobbyists far less than I trust government, which is sad but true. I do not believe that an unregulated market will police itself; the US has basically proven this. I don't go around saying money is the root of all evil, you know, but perhaps endlessly pursuing wealth(or happiness) is not the way to acquire it.

To say that more government necessarily means less freedom is naive in the extreme and displays a lack of familiarity with different shades of government and policy in effect around the world. Sorry if that's not "being nice," but you did pimp your post on my flickr page, so I feel... entitled. :)

Anyway, good luck in the next four years and I hope you get involved.