Charles, Cast Your Net a Bit Wider

The other day I noted John Edwards’ be healed, by voting for Kerry, speech.  Today, I see Charles Krauthammer is noting Edwards’ little revival speech, and taking him to task for it, as well he should.  But, it is the last sentence of Charles’ piece which could be more encompassing.

“There is absolutely nothing the man will not say to get elected.”

I’d state that there is absolutely nothing any man, running for the dubious distinction of political office, would say to get elected.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 10/15 at 01:00 PM
  1. John Venlet: I’d state that there is absolutely nothing any man, running for the dubious distinction of political office, would say to get elected.

    How do you arrive at this conclusion?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/15  at  01:55 PM
  2. Mr. Venlet,

    I just stumbled across this, and thought it apropos ... I was wondering whether you might want to comment on this article, and Mr. Parker’s statements (a fellow Anarchist) regarding voting and the 9/11 attacks?

    Ken Parker: The atrocity of 9-11 “doesn’t affect us the hip-hop community,” he said. “9-11 happened to them, not us,” he added, explaining that by “them” he meant “the rich [the Powerful] ... those who are oppressing us.

    Ken Parker: Voting in a corrupt society adds more corruption,” he added. “America has to commit suicide if the world is to be a better place.

    Where have I heard that before?


    http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/1014krs14-ON.html

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/15  at  02:21 PM
  3. Serpent, maybe after I read it, in its entirety, I might comment.  Thanks for pointing it out.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/15  at  02:41 PM
  4. -John: “I’d state that there is absolutely nothing any man, running for the dubious distinction of political office, would say to get elected.”

    -Serpent:“How do you arrive at this conclusion?”

    One only has to follow the political pandering of the candidates.  Most any-thing they claim can be held to the light thanks to the internet. (i.e. factcheck.org etc.)

    Politics is having a difficult time with todays technology. What they say and the methods they use only work on the ignorant.

    Posted by The Wizard  on  10/15  at  08:05 PM
  5. “What they say and the methods they use only work on the ignorant.”

    Fortunately for professional jobholders, the electorate is overwhelmingly composed of the ignorant.

    Posted by John Lopez  on  10/15  at  11:00 PM
  6. If a politician will say anything to get elected, then won’t a businessman or an entrepreneur say anything (i.e. lie) to sell his products? Maybe that explains why so many “Anarchists” eventually evolve into Communists?

    This “argument” seems rather nebulous and incoherent. In fact, it sounds a lot more like (cynical/pessimistic) question begging than a logical proof.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/18  at  09:41 AM
  7. An unscrupulous businessman may say anything to sell his wares, but the fact remains, I do not have to purchase his wares, whereas with a politician I am subjected to his and his groups’ whims whether I like them or not.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/18  at  09:48 AM
  8. Not True.

    You could have chosen to live somewhere else (In a different Society).

    Besides, my point was if ALL “politicans”, lie, then don’t ALL “businessmen” lie?

    What is so “magical” about the label “politician”?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/18  at  11:17 AM
  9. “Besides, my point was if ALL “politicans”, lie, then don’t ALL “businessmen” lie?”

    Not necessarily.  Though possibly, “ALL” businessmen lie, not all of them necessarily do, whereas for “ALL” politicians, lying is necessary.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/18  at  02:17 PM
  10. What is so magical about the term “politician” that anyone thusly labeled is transformed into a liar and cheat?

    You have to understand that from my perspective this is exactly like a Nazi trying to tell me (not explain, but tell) how anyone labelled as a “Jew” is inferior, and doesn’t deserve to exist.

    You seem to be equating the act of “governing” with acts of crime (such as murder, or rape). Of course I would say that the notion of “crime” implies a consensus of opinion (like Democracy), which by your logic would also be a “crime”.

    Let me ask you this, is the head of a household anything like the leader of his (or her) tribe (family group)? Does that make him or her a “politician”? Does that mean that the head of a household is always a criminal, liar, and cheat (relative to the rest of the family/tribe)? Do you practice a system of Anarchy in your own home?



    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  10/18  at  02:53 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Next entry: A Tome

Previous entry: Dead Horse Wisdom

<< Back to main