September 20, 2012
Post #3120 – 20120920
I know I just said something, but had to respond to the person who posted on the same day I did…
A lot of folks are wondering why Mr. Pinkwater has turned into a political commentator. I am glad he has something to say on the subject. I am relieved to hear he shares his general political viewpoints with me.
I would like to say that we haven’t had a president do this country any major good since the 50’s.
That being said, my current policy is to vote for the guy who has as little of a personal agenda as possible, as well as the person who has the potential to do the least amount of harm.
Right now, that person happens to be president Obama. Before him it was Clinton, someone who also will be remembered as mostly harmless.
Instead of voting for someone who promises to do good, aim lower. Vote for the guy least likely to screw the job up entirely, and you will never be disappointed with the outcome.
Actually, I overstepped by stating website policy. It's really Ed's website, and I am just one of the contributors, while also the subject thereof. Usually he accepts my suggestions, but I also usually accept his. So, it was not really for me to say that we would post no more political opinions. I was reacting to the conditioned-response post from a dear reader occasioned by my first and only campaign statement on the front page of the site, and didn't want to pollute this forum with empty arguments pro and con. But, it is up to Ed whether Ms. Brown's post appears.
I agree with Ms. Brown that presidents are mostly a necessary evil. What I consider important in the current election is exemplified by the one post that has appeared in opposition to my statement. It contains a list of standard talking-points put forth by one of the parties--only this being a high-IQ sort of website, the ones about Obama being a Muslim, a socialist, and foreign-born do not appear. These points are repeated ad infinitum, and a significant number of people have incorporated them and use them instead of ideas. The other side has a similar list, and sells them through advertising the same way. I further agree with Ms. Brown that this time around, the Republican slogan-based argument represents an attitude apt to lead to more general harm than the Democratic one.