i think it is pretty harmful overall to insist on politicians being either square or round, liberal or conservatives. I read an interesting editortial the other day that said that these are labels that nobody even applies to themselves. Instead, most people describe themselves as pragmatists. Interesting if true.
Dana On 2/20/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > gMoney wrote: > > Anyone still "fuzzy" in those areas has shown no ability to make "data > > driven" decisions, nor to have learned from the mistakes of the past. > > > +1000, and good clarification. The philosophy should be clear, the > positions should be open to change. > > That having been said there are many times when you've got to pick the > worst of few alternatives and this is where I think many politicians > get burned. > > For example a bill that increases funding for Walter Reed but also > increases troop levels in Iraq. I wish your average voter understood > that and stopped using the "they voted for 99 liberal/conservative > bills". > > The question is, what is their stated philosophy and, if it appears to > differ from votes, why? > > That's why I think we need the factcheck.org disclaimers on political > commercials. Should be a minimum of 10 seconds for any political ad. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 The most significant release in over 10 years. Upgrade & see new features. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:228440 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
