I'm a die-hard libertarian, and have voted such since I saw the light and was babtised in the superiority of freedom. What is bothering me is that I realize how much is riding on this election. 3-5 supreme court justices, and a possible loss of congress to democrats. I am very tempted to vote Bush, and live hard with my decision, but each time I think that, I keep hearing my fathers advice to stand up for what is right even though sometimes you'll stand alone. Since I don't know who it'll be this time around, I will honestly post after my vote who I voted for. I'll more than likely vote Libertarian anyway, but the idea of a Gore presidency is spooky. (Note: a vote for Browne is a vote for Browne, not Gore, the republicans can't lose my vote, as no political party has my vote to begin with. Not even the libertarians, only the philosophy carrys my vote.) Will anyone else honestly tell whom they voted for and why?
Libertarian honesty
- Thread starter kjm
- Start date
If you vote for a third party at this stage, it WILL be a vote for Gore. Didn't anyone learn anything from the Perot fiasco in '92? The people who are likely to vote libertarian are the same ones who would normally vote for Bush in a straight two way contest. All you are doing is pulling support from him.
AllanHampton
New member
kjm, hang in there because you and your Father are correct. Americans voting their fears rather than their good sense is exactly the greatest part, greed is another part, of the reason we are where we are today. Fear, the individual's fear, is a dangerous ruler of the mind. Fear is an ally only in raising a caution flag.
I know for a fact the correct reason we vote in this Republic is to preserve the Republic. Therefore the only good conscience vote is cast for the candidate the voter honestly believes will obey and honor the oath of office. We either vote to preserve the Republic or lose it. We are today on the very brink of losing it too.
In this Republic the Constitution is the truth in government/politics.
Yes, I will tell you who I voted for, Perot both times, and straight Reform Party last time. Next time, I have not made up my mind, but for sure it won't be a republican and especially not a democrat. 70-80 years of history clearly shows voting for democrats and/or republicans is not in the best of this Republic, they do not (for the most part) obey nor honor the oath of office.
[This message has been edited by AllanHampton (edited May 04, 2000).]
I know for a fact the correct reason we vote in this Republic is to preserve the Republic. Therefore the only good conscience vote is cast for the candidate the voter honestly believes will obey and honor the oath of office. We either vote to preserve the Republic or lose it. We are today on the very brink of losing it too.
In this Republic the Constitution is the truth in government/politics.
Yes, I will tell you who I voted for, Perot both times, and straight Reform Party last time. Next time, I have not made up my mind, but for sure it won't be a republican and especially not a democrat. 70-80 years of history clearly shows voting for democrats and/or republicans is not in the best of this Republic, they do not (for the most part) obey nor honor the oath of office.
[This message has been edited by AllanHampton (edited May 04, 2000).]
Nestor Rivera
New member
It is better to build a ship then cling to a life raft, unless of course you are in the deep ocean and there is a life raft handy.
Don't vote you fears vote for the best candidate that can win. This is not an opinion poll this will decide the next congress of the USA
Don't vote you fears vote for the best candidate that can win. This is not an opinion poll this will decide the next congress of the USA
Here we go again. Did Allan put you up to this? LOL Just recently, we have had a couple of very long threads about this very contentious subject. I would suggest that you do a "search" for "third party" and you will see all of the info you need.
I'm not a moderator, or I would lock this thread. *grin*
Joe
http://second.amendment.homepage.com
I'm not a moderator, or I would lock this thread. *grin*
Joe
http://second.amendment.homepage.com
AllanHampton
New member
Nestor Rivera, how do you know who will win?
nralife, no I did not put him up to it, but I think it is a good subject to discuss. It divides us and divided we will fall. Our common ground (bond) in America the Republic and politics thereof is the Constitution and that is what we have to stand together on to keep this Republic. The Republic of America with freedom for all is what I am afraid of losing and I speak and vote accordingly.
nralife, no I did not put him up to it, but I think it is a good subject to discuss. It divides us and divided we will fall. Our common ground (bond) in America the Republic and politics thereof is the Constitution and that is what we have to stand together on to keep this Republic. The Republic of America with freedom for all is what I am afraid of losing and I speak and vote accordingly.
Well, personally, since I come from the libertarian wing of the Republican Party (I have this silly notion that they can be saved from themselves), if either McCain or Liddy Dole had gotten the nomination I would have voted "L" for the first time in a National election...
However, since we gunnies like to use the example of the tyrant in our arguments, let's do that. Say it is an election year and you are the head of a major libertarian movement of some one-million voters. You know the third candidate that holds your views can't win, but it sure is fun to poke a finger in the other guys' eyes. The one candidate is the run of the mill status quo guy who could possibly win without your votes but might be hurt without them. The other guy, a real tyrant-in-training could win. Do you tell your people to stand up for libertarian principles thus risking the bad guy gets a real shot at getting in, or do you suggest that they do whatever they can to keep the bad guy out.
Most libertarians would say, "There is no such thing as a wasted vote..."
No consider that it is 1933 in soon-to-be Nazi Germany and the bad guy is the head of the Nazi party. Or, heck, it's 1992 and it is Bill Clinton. What were they saying just eight years ago? "It couldn't get much worse...Bush raised our taxes and banned importation of semi-autos..." How much would you give to get the last eight years back?
Rick
However, since we gunnies like to use the example of the tyrant in our arguments, let's do that. Say it is an election year and you are the head of a major libertarian movement of some one-million voters. You know the third candidate that holds your views can't win, but it sure is fun to poke a finger in the other guys' eyes. The one candidate is the run of the mill status quo guy who could possibly win without your votes but might be hurt without them. The other guy, a real tyrant-in-training could win. Do you tell your people to stand up for libertarian principles thus risking the bad guy gets a real shot at getting in, or do you suggest that they do whatever they can to keep the bad guy out.
Most libertarians would say, "There is no such thing as a wasted vote..."
No consider that it is 1933 in soon-to-be Nazi Germany and the bad guy is the head of the Nazi party. Or, heck, it's 1992 and it is Bill Clinton. What were they saying just eight years ago? "It couldn't get much worse...Bush raised our taxes and banned importation of semi-autos..." How much would you give to get the last eight years back?
Rick
Maybe the Libertarian party would make a better showing in Presidential races if it had more local and state presence.
There are so few Libertarian officeholders compared to the two larger parties.
Perhaps once the city and state governments could provide examples of how well the Libertarian philosophy works, followed by an influx of Senators and Congressmen, the Presidency might be a reality.
Until then, IMHO it is a wasted vote.
------------------
NRA/GOA/SAF/USMC
"Janet Reno isn't an Attorney, she's just a General"
Oregon residents please support the Oregon Firearms Federation, our only "No compromise" gun lobby.
http://www.oregonfirearms.org
There are so few Libertarian officeholders compared to the two larger parties.
Perhaps once the city and state governments could provide examples of how well the Libertarian philosophy works, followed by an influx of Senators and Congressmen, the Presidency might be a reality.
Until then, IMHO it is a wasted vote.
------------------
NRA/GOA/SAF/USMC
"Janet Reno isn't an Attorney, she's just a General"
Oregon residents please support the Oregon Firearms Federation, our only "No compromise" gun lobby.
http://www.oregonfirearms.org
So we don't vote Libertarian because they don't have enough candidates. And they don't have enough candidates because we don't vote Libertarian - because they don't have enough candidates - because we don't ...
-----
Voting for X is a vote for Z? Then a vote for a Republican is a vote for Democratic gun control(lite).
Haven't we learned anything since the days of Prohibition?
The Republicans and the Democrats are a lot closer to each other than to us. Why else do we continue to "enjoy" the fruits of Republican/Democratic gun control?
Oh well, "just this once" - again. It's the eternal cry, election after election, of the Republican Big Government addicts.
Study diligently to learn this phrase:
"What can one man do? It's the government!"
Get the plaintive whine down to the tones dictated by our Republican, Democrat, United Nations masters.....
-----
Voting for X is a vote for Z? Then a vote for a Republican is a vote for Democratic gun control(lite).
Haven't we learned anything since the days of Prohibition?
The Republicans and the Democrats are a lot closer to each other than to us. Why else do we continue to "enjoy" the fruits of Republican/Democratic gun control?
Oh well, "just this once" - again. It's the eternal cry, election after election, of the Republican Big Government addicts.
Study diligently to learn this phrase:
"What can one man do? It's the government!"
Get the plaintive whine down to the tones dictated by our Republican, Democrat, United Nations masters.....
David Roberson
New member
Thank you, Dennis.
I guess I'll keep having to say this every time an incarnation of this thread reappears, but if everyone who said "I'll vote Libertarian when ..." would simply go ahead and VOTE Libertarian, the resulting groundswell would terrify the Democrats and the Republicans. We've already seen that when Bradley and McCain looked they had some winning issues, The Evil Al Gore and George Bush moved to co-opt them. Libertarians don't have to win to influence the process -- if they show strength, the Democrats and Republicans will start trying to adopt as many of their issues as possible. Hey, it's not like these people have principles or anything. They just want to do what it takes to get elected.
If The Evil Al Gore is elected, the people who voted for him will be responsible. Republicans who don't like that should consider nominating a decent candidate the next time instead of trying to find ways of blaming others for Republican failures.
Yes, Bush would be a better president than Gore. But not by much.
I guess I'll keep having to say this every time an incarnation of this thread reappears, but if everyone who said "I'll vote Libertarian when ..." would simply go ahead and VOTE Libertarian, the resulting groundswell would terrify the Democrats and the Republicans. We've already seen that when Bradley and McCain looked they had some winning issues, The Evil Al Gore and George Bush moved to co-opt them. Libertarians don't have to win to influence the process -- if they show strength, the Democrats and Republicans will start trying to adopt as many of their issues as possible. Hey, it's not like these people have principles or anything. They just want to do what it takes to get elected.
If The Evil Al Gore is elected, the people who voted for him will be responsible. Republicans who don't like that should consider nominating a decent candidate the next time instead of trying to find ways of blaming others for Republican failures.
Yes, Bush would be a better president than Gore. But not by much.
Dennis,I agree with you BUT, there is far too much at stake to stand up for what you believe in. If we are going to maintian some of our rights then we have to take small steps. And I don't just mean gun rights. Gore will be a big step in the wrong direction. Bush at least will hold the fort. He may actually swing further right if he gets elected. And don't forget that Clinton didn't win either of his elections with a majority of the vote. He only got 40 some percent. So if the Perot people had voted for Bush or Dole we wouldn't be where we are now.
------------------
[This message has been edited by Magoo1 (edited May 04, 2000).]
------------------
[This message has been edited by Magoo1 (edited May 04, 2000).]
Christopher II
New member
Magoo1,
Nope. There was a thread around here some time ago that put rest to that rumor. I don't remember it word for word, but the gist was that even if every Perot voter had instead voted for Bush, Clinton still would have won. Handily.
I'm perfectly willing to give W. a chance. If he picks a pro-freedom, anti-state running mate (Keyes, etc...) then he'll get my vote, and the vote of anyone I can convince. Otherwise, forget him. I'll vote for Browne and take my chances.
Later,
Chris
------------------
"TV what do I see, tell me who to believe, what's the use of autonomy when a button does it all??" - Incubus, Idiot Box
Nope. There was a thread around here some time ago that put rest to that rumor. I don't remember it word for word, but the gist was that even if every Perot voter had instead voted for Bush, Clinton still would have won. Handily.
I'm perfectly willing to give W. a chance. If he picks a pro-freedom, anti-state running mate (Keyes, etc...) then he'll get my vote, and the vote of anyone I can convince. Otherwise, forget him. I'll vote for Browne and take my chances.
Later,
Chris
------------------
"TV what do I see, tell me who to believe, what's the use of autonomy when a button does it all??" - Incubus, Idiot Box
David, Alan,
You guys hit the nail on the head. Thanks for reaffirming my doubting ways. It is easy to get scared, but in the long run, we will have to send a message. That message will either force both parties to take pause, and address some issues, or to realize that they are heading the way of the Whigs. IF the Republicans would only run someone who had a solid foundation in the Constitution, I would vote for them. Rest assured that GW will do everything he can to lose. He will move to the left (read center), and try to pick up liberal votes, and that has always 100% of the time lost elections. He will appoint a liberal republican for VP, and in the long run will lose even more votes.
One of these days, the jacka**es will figure out that they need to move to the right, and pick up the tens of thousands of libertarian votes that would move back to the Republican party if they would only give a reason to.
What I fear most is the Balkanization of the nation, and how it all seems to be falling apart. I don't know if it can be turned around, but I'm pretty sure that doing more of what hasn't worked in the last 60 years, probably wont change things.
You guys hit the nail on the head. Thanks for reaffirming my doubting ways. It is easy to get scared, but in the long run, we will have to send a message. That message will either force both parties to take pause, and address some issues, or to realize that they are heading the way of the Whigs. IF the Republicans would only run someone who had a solid foundation in the Constitution, I would vote for them. Rest assured that GW will do everything he can to lose. He will move to the left (read center), and try to pick up liberal votes, and that has always 100% of the time lost elections. He will appoint a liberal republican for VP, and in the long run will lose even more votes.
One of these days, the jacka**es will figure out that they need to move to the right, and pick up the tens of thousands of libertarian votes that would move back to the Republican party if they would only give a reason to.
What I fear most is the Balkanization of the nation, and how it all seems to be falling apart. I don't know if it can be turned around, but I'm pretty sure that doing more of what hasn't worked in the last 60 years, probably wont change things.
Hey all
Well, I understand where both sides are coming from here. My personal decision has wavered back and forth (best "realistic" non democrat vs voting for those who best reflect my views). However,after Miami, I want to send a clear message to clinton and the democrats who blindly support him. In national elections, I'm voting republican. Locally , probably Libertarian. BTW, I'm an ex democrat, and I will be sending letters to the party telling where and when they lost my support.
------------------
Rob
From the Committee to Use Proffesional Politicians as Lab Animals
Well, I understand where both sides are coming from here. My personal decision has wavered back and forth (best "realistic" non democrat vs voting for those who best reflect my views). However,after Miami, I want to send a clear message to clinton and the democrats who blindly support him. In national elections, I'm voting republican. Locally , probably Libertarian. BTW, I'm an ex democrat, and I will be sending letters to the party telling where and when they lost my support.
------------------
Rob
From the Committee to Use Proffesional Politicians as Lab Animals
*Yawn*
Here we go again. The timeless argument, the permanently-hung jury....... The horse's carcass, reduced to a ground pulp, still being beaten with fervor and sometimes anger....
For all it's worth, here's my .02....
1) If the Republicans are good enough for the gun industry, whose survival depends in part on the election's result, they are good enough for me.
2) All the 1860's-sounding slogans such as
"Fear, the individual's fear, is a dangerous ruler of the mind"
are crafty and well-worded, but rely on the presupmtion of knowing someone else's thoughts to a T (where in most cases we don't even know each other's names)... And then, in most cases you can switch the word "fear" with "realism" and "dangerous" with "sober" and voila', it sounds just as good, if not better.
3) As for the argument "if we all vote Libertarian we'll lose, but we'll scare the pants off the Democrats/Republicans and maybe they rethink their evil ways and hang their heads in shame", it almost makes me smile. Yeah,I can just imagine Gore on election night moping over the astounding 5% Libertarian turnout instead of enjoying his victory party.
4) Washington, DC makes me sick. I work quite close to it, but make it a point to never set foot in it. It revolts me for what is stands for, for all the abuses that go on there and for the fact that it is becoming an Imperial Capital where a fat political class live the jet-set life at our expenses. Nevertheless, unless there is a second war of secession, Washington is what we have to work with, and utopia of any kind is just that - a pipe dream.
5) Although we all agree (with minor variations) that the Libertarians are the torch-bearers of the right ideas, we differ as to the assigned value and possible consequence of a Libertarian vote in Election 2000. I happen to think that, even if the whole TFL membership and their family and inner-circles voted LP, we would amount to little more than a foot-note in the post-election statistics. "But how can you say that and still claim that doing so would de facto elect Gore?" I can't. However, recent history shows that any amount of 3rd-party support goes in favor of the Democrats, or at least this is how I interpreted the last 2 elections.
6) To some of us, there is no real difference between R and D. They are all "the system" and are therefore all rotten. Although there is a good deal of truth in this statement, it is also very true that D is the natural home of Liberalism, which in turn is the natural breeding ground for Socialism , Tyranny and Gun-control. Draw your own conclusions from that. I drew mine.
7) As I said before, Election 2000 is not a good time to try experiments and to tie one's sense of integrity and sense of masculine honor to one's behavior at the ballot box. It is a time to be sober, cautious and to clearly ponder the immediate consequences of a D vs R presidential cabinet for the next 4-8 years and its impact on the causes dear to us. If this is your definition of fear, suit yourself.
8) In a climate where 90% of the media have a Liberal slant, and where "the system" is defined by the left, a vote for Bush (or for any Republican) is a vote against the system. Just wait and see how the press will comment on a Bush victory - angry white males, rednecks, the Country's PMS, collective consumption of booze, a computer virus, an alien invasion.... you'll hear them all.
9) And like I have said before, you got to build up numbers before you plan an attack (or a defense, for that matter). Unless, of course, you draw pleasure from thinking yourself in a doomed and heroic last-stand, a notion to which I attach no sense of gratification whatsoever.
10) I can't and I don't say that the LP (or the Constitutionalists, or even the Southern Party) can't win. I say, and with a great deal of confidence at that, that they can't win Election 2000, no matter how many determined individuals vote for them. The awareness, the place in the National dialogue, the media presence, the coverage, the publicity, the channels, are simply not there yet. Most Americans don't even know we have a 3rd party. And to say "well, but if we all vote for them....." is, once again, just pure utopia.
Let's build up the numbers and then make a good showing, one that can really make a difference. For now, though, I am going with Bush.
------------------
Private gun ownership is the capital sin in the left's godless religion. Crime is merely a venial mistake.
Check out these gals: www.sas-aim.org
Here we go again. The timeless argument, the permanently-hung jury....... The horse's carcass, reduced to a ground pulp, still being beaten with fervor and sometimes anger....
For all it's worth, here's my .02....
1) If the Republicans are good enough for the gun industry, whose survival depends in part on the election's result, they are good enough for me.
2) All the 1860's-sounding slogans such as
"Fear, the individual's fear, is a dangerous ruler of the mind"
are crafty and well-worded, but rely on the presupmtion of knowing someone else's thoughts to a T (where in most cases we don't even know each other's names)... And then, in most cases you can switch the word "fear" with "realism" and "dangerous" with "sober" and voila', it sounds just as good, if not better.
3) As for the argument "if we all vote Libertarian we'll lose, but we'll scare the pants off the Democrats/Republicans and maybe they rethink their evil ways and hang their heads in shame", it almost makes me smile. Yeah,I can just imagine Gore on election night moping over the astounding 5% Libertarian turnout instead of enjoying his victory party.
4) Washington, DC makes me sick. I work quite close to it, but make it a point to never set foot in it. It revolts me for what is stands for, for all the abuses that go on there and for the fact that it is becoming an Imperial Capital where a fat political class live the jet-set life at our expenses. Nevertheless, unless there is a second war of secession, Washington is what we have to work with, and utopia of any kind is just that - a pipe dream.
5) Although we all agree (with minor variations) that the Libertarians are the torch-bearers of the right ideas, we differ as to the assigned value and possible consequence of a Libertarian vote in Election 2000. I happen to think that, even if the whole TFL membership and their family and inner-circles voted LP, we would amount to little more than a foot-note in the post-election statistics. "But how can you say that and still claim that doing so would de facto elect Gore?" I can't. However, recent history shows that any amount of 3rd-party support goes in favor of the Democrats, or at least this is how I interpreted the last 2 elections.
6) To some of us, there is no real difference between R and D. They are all "the system" and are therefore all rotten. Although there is a good deal of truth in this statement, it is also very true that D is the natural home of Liberalism, which in turn is the natural breeding ground for Socialism , Tyranny and Gun-control. Draw your own conclusions from that. I drew mine.
7) As I said before, Election 2000 is not a good time to try experiments and to tie one's sense of integrity and sense of masculine honor to one's behavior at the ballot box. It is a time to be sober, cautious and to clearly ponder the immediate consequences of a D vs R presidential cabinet for the next 4-8 years and its impact on the causes dear to us. If this is your definition of fear, suit yourself.
8) In a climate where 90% of the media have a Liberal slant, and where "the system" is defined by the left, a vote for Bush (or for any Republican) is a vote against the system. Just wait and see how the press will comment on a Bush victory - angry white males, rednecks, the Country's PMS, collective consumption of booze, a computer virus, an alien invasion.... you'll hear them all.
9) And like I have said before, you got to build up numbers before you plan an attack (or a defense, for that matter). Unless, of course, you draw pleasure from thinking yourself in a doomed and heroic last-stand, a notion to which I attach no sense of gratification whatsoever.
10) I can't and I don't say that the LP (or the Constitutionalists, or even the Southern Party) can't win. I say, and with a great deal of confidence at that, that they can't win Election 2000, no matter how many determined individuals vote for them. The awareness, the place in the National dialogue, the media presence, the coverage, the publicity, the channels, are simply not there yet. Most Americans don't even know we have a 3rd party. And to say "well, but if we all vote for them....." is, once again, just pure utopia.
Let's build up the numbers and then make a good showing, one that can really make a difference. For now, though, I am going with Bush.
------------------
Private gun ownership is the capital sin in the left's godless religion. Crime is merely a venial mistake.
Check out these gals: www.sas-aim.org
I don't want to burst any bubbles here, but have you ever noted that it really doesn't matter who you vote for.
I'm not kidding. Has your one vote ever been decisive for a Presidential election. Of course, if you can, through your brilliant rhetoric, sway a large number of others to do something then you might have an effect. But, especially in large states, your single vote is essentially meaningless.
If you are really concerned follow the polls close to the election time for your state. If your state is strongly in favor of a certain candidate, say Gore(Massachussets?), you'll probably lose nothing by voting Libertarian. If on the other hand you live in say Utah(a Bush state?), you'll lose nothing by voting Libertarian.
In other words, my advice, vote for the candidate who holds the views that you support. If the election in your state otherwise seems that it will be decided by a razor's margin, then you can perhaps justify voting for the lesser evil.
Just my thoughts on the issue. Debate away.
I'm not kidding. Has your one vote ever been decisive for a Presidential election. Of course, if you can, through your brilliant rhetoric, sway a large number of others to do something then you might have an effect. But, especially in large states, your single vote is essentially meaningless.
If you are really concerned follow the polls close to the election time for your state. If your state is strongly in favor of a certain candidate, say Gore(Massachussets?), you'll probably lose nothing by voting Libertarian. If on the other hand you live in say Utah(a Bush state?), you'll lose nothing by voting Libertarian.
In other words, my advice, vote for the candidate who holds the views that you support. If the election in your state otherwise seems that it will be decided by a razor's margin, then you can perhaps justify voting for the lesser evil.
Just my thoughts on the issue. Debate away.
I'd like to see a show of paws of Libertarians who are going to vote Republican solely because of one of our debates here on TFL. I'd like to see a further show of paws of the Republicans who are going to vote Libertarian for the same reason.
Let's see it folks. If you vote Republican or Libertarian and changed the way you're going to vote because of a debate here at the Firing Line, let us know.
LawDog
Let's see it folks. If you vote Republican or Libertarian and changed the way you're going to vote because of a debate here at the Firing Line, let us know.
LawDog
I'll admit that I have drifted a bit from the more comfortable Republican side of the pool to to deeper Libertarian end as a result of much that has been hashed out here over many months.
There just isn't enough chlorine in the Republican end any more to compensate for the amount of lazy people I have supported faithfully who continue to piss on me and say it is koolade.
Plus the Libertarian end has a slide and is very uncrowded
.
There just isn't enough chlorine in the Republican end any more to compensate for the amount of lazy people I have supported faithfully who continue to piss on me and say it is koolade.
Plus the Libertarian end has a slide and is very uncrowded
.Registered as a Rep. years ago, but have since come around to libertarian point of view. Will vote libertarian not because of discussions here, but because that's what I am.
L. Neil Smith!
Magoo 1 wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>there is far too much at stake to stand up for what you believe in.[/quote]
I guess the proper course of action is to vote for what we DON'T believe in, huh? Hey, it's what we believe in that's at stake!!!!
------------------
Shoot straight & make big holes, regards, Richard at The Shottist's Center
[This message has been edited by 45King (edited May 05, 2000).]
L. Neil Smith!
Magoo 1 wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>there is far too much at stake to stand up for what you believe in.[/quote]
I guess the proper course of action is to vote for what we DON'T believe in, huh? Hey, it's what we believe in that's at stake!!!!
------------------
Shoot straight & make big holes, regards, Richard at The Shottist's Center
[This message has been edited by 45King (edited May 05, 2000).]