TRIVIA.....Will history be repeated ? ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Andrew

This thread introduced me to some new perspectives. That is, as a moderate, I'm not hardwired to advocate or slam based on the "R" or "D" by a candidate's name. Among other decision criteria, the following stand out for me:

1. Higher earners should pay more tax. On the one hand based on fairness, why? Should a penalty be imposed on those (or their family) who GENERALLY earned or worked for it? Rather than focusing on how to save a penny (like most living paycheck to paycheck), maybe use that energy on how to make a dollar. I just don't get why someone is obligated to pay more just because they have the means to do so.

On the other hand, having a poverty mass (as the middle class shrinks) doesn't do a society any good. Basically, lift up the poor or by shear number, or they will pull you down.

2. Those that fear intelligence usually because they have little and can't come to grips with it. All this McCain is a regular guy, someone to have a beer with - unlike Obama who's "elitist" - is simply low self esteem rearing it's head. Many have other reasons for not liking Obama, but don't hate the guy for sinply being smart(er). There's something in the American fabric that doesn't like experts or perceived intellectual inequality.

Lastly, of all the posts in this thread, this was one of my favs:
_______
No matter how you vote it speaks volumes that you have the following candidates to choose from:

1. an african america raised by a single mother
2. a man who lost EVERYTHING before he even started his first term in the Senate (my opinon of everything would be my kid(s) and wife)
3. a man who spent five tortuous years as a POW
4. a woman who came from nowhere to become a mayor, then governor and now potential VP.

Why is race used as a describer in #1, but not #2, #3 and #4?

Fun stuff, a little uncivil at times, but important nevertheless.

"Take your life in your own hands and what happens? A terrible thing: no one to blame." -- Erica Jong