Mr. Sherrard wrote:
>The truly sad part is that we DID study the history of our candidates and
the lot that were elected were probably the LESSER of the evils.
Exactly! This is true way often. It is also a sad indictment of our culture.
Maybe it's time for us to take the example set by Albert Finney's character
in "Network" and go to our windows and yell, "I'm madder than Hell and I'm
not going to take it anymore."

I will not vote for evil, lesser or greater. When I am put into the
situation, which is often, I skip that ballot line. There have been many
elections where I only vote on the referenda.

Many people say that if you don't vote you can't complain about the results;
that is a moral duty to vote. I respectfully disagree. When the only
decision is the degree or type of evil you are willing to tolerate then you
have the right to be dissatisfied with the election results. It is a moral
imperative to thwart from evil not to vote for it.

Someone wrote in this thread, I hope in jest, that we should repeal the 17th
amendment. It was suggested that this would stop the corruption of "big
money" politics. If "national" politicians are corrupt due to lack of
transparency then I can only project how much more corrupt "local"
authorities that can sneak in under our "radar" would be for the same
reason.

I am not telling anyone not to vote. Follow your conscience. If you like a
candidate's ideas then by all means vote for them. If you think they are
*evil* then don't vote for them.

To conclude with a paraphrase from the above mentioned movie, I would like
to see evil politicians "die from lack of ratings."

The opinions expressed herein are my own and not necessarily those of my
employer.
Yosef Rosenblatt

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *