Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: George Coyne who wrote (41913)	4/8/1999 10:56:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>Johannes, I totally understand your reluctance to vote for the lesser of two evils. But please consider the possibility that by abhoring that choice that you may actually contribute to the greater of the two evils.< You see, I do not think I would contribute at all to the greater evil. Perhaps my vote (or lack of a vote) would not be as directly effective against the evil, but I will not have contributed to it. It seems to me ultimately more prudent to vote in accordance with what I believe than for what I do not believe in order to obstruct a candidate I find more objectionable. It seems reasonable to me that I finally support what I believe because supporting what I do not believe will at best provide me only what I do not believe. In voting for what I believe, I will at least have the hope, such as it is, that what I believe will be successful. At the least, I will better enable what I believe to be propagated so that over the long haul, what I believe will perhaps garner success. On the other hand, in voting for what I disbelieve, I can have no real hope of seeing what I believe ever standing a chance. >I realize that my vote in '92 was only one of many for Perot, but in toto, my mentality was enough to give us 8 years of abomination.< Your mentality did not do this. It was the mentality of Clintonians that did it. You voted for Perot. It just happens that the Clintonian 42% won (as it turns out, they lost). >I too admire Keyes, but I am torn.< I am not torn in the least. Keyes is a great American from all I can see. He deserves my support, and so he will get it. He deserves your support also (grin). Surely I do not look upon him as any sort of Saviour, but it certainly would be nice to see him sitting in the White House leading this country toward respectability. Just imagine it. State-of-the-union addresses will actually have meaning. Presidential speeches will have sincerity and conviction. Keyes has some very bold, enticing ideas, most of which would do wonders for the country should they get through Congress. From all I have heard and read of and from him, he has quite a novel idea. He actually wants America to be returned to the people. Fancy that. Perhaps he cannot get to the White House. We will never know unless we try. In any event I will certainly enjoy the ride as I and no doubt many others endeavour to push him with our might to get him as far as we can. If we lose, we lose; but I will be honoured-- most honoured to have fought to place a nobleman in leadership, and that, my friend, is politics the way it should be. I overlooked Keyes earlier because of “viability”. It was a mistake. I have learned from the mistake. Never again. When and if he announces, then I will contact him.