Okay, here’s what we, in the USA, are faced with in November. The three front-runners for their party’s nomination to become President of the United States have no experience running government at any level … none, nada, zip, zero, zed. However, all three have exposure to the operations of government at various levels and for significantly different periods of time.
One of them has been caught lying almost every time she opens her mouth – she is obviously a true politician! Another expects us to believe that he is either so naïve, or so inattentive, that he was unaware his “friend, pastor, and mentor” of 20-plus years stirred the pot of racial animosity with a very large paddle, while simultaneously condemning the Senator’s country for every human misdeed since the crucifixion. The last candidate - thus far - has only committed the unforgivable act of longevity.
Anybody who expects honesty from a politician probably sits patiently watching the hearth on Christmas Eve, waiting for “you know who”. It’s a given that politicians will attempt to satisfy the desires of their audience, and we expect them to play fast and loose with the truth. The Democratic hopefuls have turned fast and loose into an art form, and set a new land speed record for "fast".
So, without honesty or true experience, what trait is left upon which we may base our voting decision? Character. And that applies to all three … two ARE characters and one HAS character. Vote accordingly. Personally, I don’t think any are particularly worthy of the office. With slightly over 301,000,000 people, these 3 are the best we could come up with? There is obviously something seriously wrong with our selection system ...
I'm Gil, and I approve this blog!