It both does and doesn't align itself with such principles.

It presumes to lecture the voters again, and the author would be well advised to see how that worked out for Obama this time. You don't call the voters "stupid" and then expect them to vote for you. Calling them stupid implies that they were stupid to vote for the politician making the statement in the first place, and to overcome that stupidity they make up for it by not making that same mistake again. About "considering the source:" There are blessed few unbiased sources, if indeed there are ANY in that category.

It's hard to calm the voters down when they get the distinct impression that the political class is not listening. In the face of large protests, raucous town hall meetings, and floods of e-mails and phone calls, they passed what was not popular and then they wonder why they are not popular. Jobs and the economy for this administration and this congress has shown them to be "all hat and no cattle." They spent damn near a year on "Health Care Reform," and then slammed through the "Financial System Reform" in just a couple of months. Even THAT does not create one job in the private sector. It creates a ton more of arrogant, incompetent, pompous, overblown bureaucrats.

Yeah, we need lots more of that BS.

That sounds like someone other than the voters is "stupid."

David

ORourke1 Signature
"Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine."--P. J. O’Rourke

On 11/7/2010 9:34 PM, David Little wrote:
All:


The intro article to this week's businessweek seemed to be quite insightful and aligned with the principals of RC.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_46/b4203008297339.htm

David

--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to