Thursday, September 18, 2008

Local "Gepetto" Speaks Out on Campaign

It was effective in 2000 and 2004. Why not, especially now, use it again? I'm referring to the litany of distractions thrust into the political discourse.
Selecting Sarah Palin instead of Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty or Rudy Guiliani, in hindsight, was really no surprise. Anyone else selected would mean that the debate would have to be about the issues. With Gov. Palin, we have been drawn into controversies over experience, lipstick, women doing it all, hockey moms, moose hunting, etc. Yes, this was a brilliant Republican strategy.
But is this what we really want and what this country deserves? These same brilliant Republican strategies were used in one way or another to win in 2000 and 2004. What exactly did we win -- lost jobs, lost homes, lost health care, lost pensions, lost wealth and stolen dreams of retirement? Although brilliant, this strategy is a sad reflection of what strategists think of the electorate.
Let's demand that the candidates talk about the issues. Their detailed policies, not just their position on issues, will settle who is qualified, ready to lead and experienced enough. This is far better than speculation about the candidates based on lies and misrepresentations.

Alan Cheah

Right on per usual Alan!


At 9:27 AM, Anonymous Alonzo said...

Hell yeah!


Post a Comment

<< Home