M2,
I'm not personally offended, sorry you thought I was. To be sure, I would be less than honest if I did not admit to uncertainty about GW's capability, but also no less concerned about what Gore would do. I do think we should accept what we know to be fact. At this juncture, beating up each candidate's liabilities with embellishment serves no purpose. We have a country that went to the polls and basically we have a tie. Obviously we have a split electorate. Clinton reportedly made a rather humorous statement: "Our country is not divided, it demonstrates healthy debate is alive." Both sides had high expectation and each got disappointment instead. There was no truly clear victor.
Should Bush win, which at this point, seems a fair possibility, I pray that he honors the country by doing what's best for it. From what I have seen, he is pragmatic and I sincerely do not think his stewardship will be radical.
If all the petty crap is removed from both candidates, I see these basic difference in personalities.
Gore not unlike Bush was born into a political family with means much beyond what most any of us will see. He has spent virtually all his life living within the political mentality. This gives me pause as to his ability for imaginative, non politically motivated problem solving.
Bush on the other hand frittered away his youth and lived a life without much direction. He did educate himself (MBA) and earned jet pilot wings (no easy task), which tells me he accomplishes when he applies himself. His history leads me to believe he will be less rigid, less combative and less political in motivation. With a country divided as is evident from recent balloting and this board, these traits will be critical if we are to move forward.
There are many men and women who do not realize their strengths and abilities until late in life. Ones potential can be elusive. I don't believe either man is inherently evil and would prefer to take a wait and see attitude rather than agonize over their foibles.
JFH |
