Replies

You know, it's really starting to bug me all the Freepers who are so holier than thou, and think that no one can have had a moral lapse at any point in their life, and therefore are not worthy of being Pubs.

My opinion, take it as it is. The reason why so many of us are upset (I'll include myself) is that you have people who have been working hard for many years, down in the trenches, doing the tough political work, and they reach a point where they have enough name recognition, that it begins to pay off, and then somebody from Hollywood comes along, and tries to knock them off their feet and throw all their hard work away.

Those celebrity types pop in without having to get their hands dirty in the political muck, and instantly expect to be front-runners and/or win. Basically they ride the backs of others.

The problem (as I see it) with the "people who have been working hard for many years, down in the trenches, doing the tough political work," is that the motivation necessary for those many years of wallowing in unsavory nastiness is in itself a mark of Cain.

Who would willingly suffer such ignominy? One must either be an egregious fanatic (in a political sense - which means that one's obsession is concerned with achieving governmental power, directly or indirectly, to compel obedience from people otherwise unwilling to do one's bidding) or a calculatingly exploitative thieving booger who seeks political power because he wants to make it "pay off" in some materially advantageous manner.

Neither type of person makes a very good neighbor, and neither can clear-headedly be trusted with public office by any sane, reasonable, actively thinking individual.

Consider the notion that the *BEST* possible thing to do to such people is to "knock them off their feet and throw all their hard work away."

"The fanatic is not really a stickler to principle. He embraces a cause not primarily because of its justness or holiness but because of his desperate need for something to hold onto." -- Eric Hoffer