I am not being courted by any of the Presidential Candidates.

I only say this to clarify my position of disgust that these are the people we have to choose from on Tuesday. It's not that I think the people who want to run this country should talk specifically to me all the time, 24/7, but shouldn't they give me a reason to care? Shouldn't there be something about the candidates that I like, rather than having to choose between lesser evils? Doesn't anyone want to match my trick with a treat?

I thought seriously about not voting this year, but then they would win, wouldn't they? I would do exactly what they want, which is to stay out of the fray. Because they don't want me in there. They don't want me to ask the questions they don't really want to answer. So I have serious problems with both big candidates, and I do realize that voting for Nader is not only a "none of the above" vote, but in a "swing state" like New Mexico where the Greens (for all their political idiocy and bad organization) have built an actual voice in the last few years, it's a vote for Bush.

I still haven't decided, but I will when I get in there. I will vote--I just wanted to clarify that.

The biggest issue I have with Bush is on his need to de-protect nationally protected lands and give carte blanche to energy companies to raze the natural landscape in hopes of finding something they can use for fuel. You know all those Texaco commercials with beautiful vistas and all that talk about exploration and scientific studies? It's about strip mining, blasting the tops off of mountains, bulldozing forests, draining rivers and lakes, sending tons of TNT deep into the earth in hopes of finding a little bit of something valuable to them.

It doesn't take much for the President to do this. It doesn't take a law. It takes an Executive Decision. In other words, they write it up and it's all done. There is no due process because protecting the lands took the same act. The government already owns this land, all they have to do is give the companies permission and presto chango, we start losing really cool places to hike and fish and do other kinds of recreational activities.

Everything else that's wrong with Bush is just the kind of crap that comes from being a dumb ass and a Republican. I mean, I'd like to think that the guy in the White House is at least competent enough to read the Constitution without having to ask for a dictionary. This Bush (unlike his father) is the kind if guy you didn't like in high school--not because he was good looking or smart or incredibly talented, but because you knew he wouldn't ever be challenged for anything in his life. He was blessed with the gift of being the son of a connected man. This pattern has never changed--not even in this election. No one expects him to be smart--they just don't want him to fall on his face. This is a leader of the free world?

Gore was born into the same type of situation. But at least he actually did well in school. He's just kind of desperate, right? Like he can't believe he's not already president. But that's not why I can't support him. It's because of his wife (and her PMRC) and his running mate, who have bullied him into taking up that smoke screen of all smoke screens: The evils of entertainment.

This is not an issue, this is like the guy with the blowhorn on the other side of the parking lot telling everyone to come over where he is because he's got something neat to show all of us. When we get there, we find out he just discovered an anthill and none of us can remember why we were in the parking lot to begin with.

When you say that ideas kill, it's kind of like saying that someday we're all gonna die. Sure, if you show a guy who already has a penchant for violence a new way to kill, he'll probably think it's a good idea. If he didn't watch that movie, he would've done it in another way. Of course, if he hadn't watched the movie, we'd have to look at the murderer's own life for answers about his behavior. It's much easier to blame Oliver Stone: crazy cat was in Vietnam. He's got issues.

And then there's Nader, who I've said many times that I'll vote for (and did in 1996). But I really don't care much about Nader's stance on anything (well, I think he's in favor of decriminalization of illegal drugs--but let's be realistic, okay), it's really about that $12 million the federal government gave to Pat Buchanan (under the guise of funding the Reform Party--which isn't even being supported by the guy who got them the right to the $12 mil in the first place, Ross Perot). What has Buchanan done with all that money? I haven't seen any evidence it has increased his fan base at all. I keep waiting for the pollsters to tell us the 1% that keeps showing up is just a drastic rounding up from 0.1%. I really don't believe that a million people are behind this cracker head.

So there I am, right back at the beginning. There's nothing for me. I don't really pay much in taxes (so tax breaks don't help). I'm not a student, a father, a married man, have huge debt, have car payments, house payments, want an abortion or own a gun.

I just want to be able to hike in the natural wonders of the world and when I'm not doing that, watch some really interesting movies (many of which explore topics that regular people don't seem very keen on), and listen to good music. I use condoms, I don't want to shoot anything, and Medicare and Social Security don't matter much to me right now.

So why am I voting? Oh yeah, the lovely monkey wrench.

Matt Worley is kind of invisible to the power elite, which is cool in its own way.