Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bucco
Good post BILLETHKID...I would encourage everyone to investigate each candidate on both sides totally..find out where they came from, how they trained for this moment in time, etc and to do that investigation in the most non bias manner. It is difficult to find a website, etc that is not partial one way or another but I would ask that every voter try very hard.
I know that so many americans just want CHANGE,.....what an overused word...but change for change sake can be so very dangerous and you mention the terrorist threat from folks who have and still say they are going to kill us all.....the stock market CHANGE does not kill people.
Investigate facts, not emails sent to you.....not from the various websites set up to promote one party of another...find out as BILLETHKID said "..who they really are VS the prime time prepared actors we only get to see."
|
The entire reason we have elections is to allow periodic change, whether that be because of the personalities in office, the policies being followed or any combination thereof. Which is why it is healthy and proper to dissect the candidates (for their capabilities and beliefs) and the policies (as they are the guidelines for action).
I find it strange that people will want to defend a candidate to the point of fanaticism, never really knowing the person except for what the candidate or others in favor of the candidate choose to release. The same goes for policies to be followed as well.
Change for change sake is nothing more than a coin flip. Unstructured change, with the projections and alternatives downstream not objectively measured, is pure folly. That's why there have been so many challenges to the "Change, We can believe in" moniker, as there is nothing from the front-end "we shall do this" showing any objective measure of the potential effect.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction is the basis for most physics, and without objective projection of what that opposite reaction is, change can be more devastating than the status quo. Common sense says you look both ways before stepping off a curb - and the same holds true for any other kind of action or choice.
Slamming candidates for the pure sake of "mine is better than yours" is childish. Examining all of the qualifications of the candidates - academic and experiential - is mature. There will NOT be any one (or two) candidates that will provide the perfect package, but that is human. The kicker is to find the better of the candidates, or candidate-teams if you prefer that, to be the next holder(s) of a 4-year job.
Senators Biden, McCain and Obama, and Gov. Palin all have their good points, bad points, shortcomings, baggage et al. The same goes for the policies they promote. The campaign is the time for all voters to "kick the tires" before relying on the new vehicle in times of peace and crises.
There is no reason for anyone to take personally a challenge regarding the qualifications (or lack thereof) of any candidate. They are not our property and don't need us to defend them, nor does anyone owe anyone else an explanation as to why we prefer any particular candidate.
These boards on TOTV were meant to share information, and not to be electronic battlefields. We are still neighbors, and will continue to be long after the moving van has dropped its load at 1600 PA Ave, DC. Let's enjoy our intellectual diversity and learn from each other as honest inquirers with a common goal - making the right choice in the next election. And let's also recognize that none of us knows everything and that being wrong goes with being human.