One Citizen Speaking... |
Posted: 02 Aug 2014 12:49 PM PDT
For all those who would vote for a minority – based on color, race, gender, sexual orientation, or national origin – think to yourself, there may be a reason why this candidate has not been elected to higher office. Perhaps “historic” candidates have been so busy campaigning and fundraising by forging alliances within their own community, that they will not and cannot represent a much broader segment of their proposed constituency. Conveying perks, privileges, and profits to the special interests and the narrow segment of the population that provided their past political success. Disappointing past experience? It hasn’t worked out so well with Barack Obama, the “historic” election of a self-described African America. It does not look promising to elect Hillary Clinton, the “historic” woman with a background of corruption, lying, and criminality; or Elizabeth “Tonto” Warren, another “historic” women who gamed the affirmative action system because someone once told her she looked like an American Indian. Or, here in California where “historic” gays and ethnic minorities have wreaked havoc as they were progressive socialist democrats with an agenda to radically transform our state into a socialist workers’ paradise that cannot exist in the real world. And, as we have seen with many of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus – they view everything through the prism of race and how it will confer special advantages to “their” community. And, most disgusting, many members seem to be saying, others have used the system to get rich, and now it is our turn. No consideration for their broader constituency – and in many cases, their nation. Bottom line … I would much rather see someone elected on the basis of competence and demonstrable achievement than elect another “historic” candidate based on color, race, gender, sexual orientation, or national origin. -- steve |
No comments:
Post a Comment