Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Daniel ~ I'm sorry, he thought serving the Bush agenda would do some good? For who? Then I'd have to say his judgment is suspect, or his motives.
.
.
.
He should have said no and kept his dignity. He should have been able to wait for a REAL opportunity. |
Was it not you who counciled in another topic that we sometimes have to choose the lesser of two evils?
As an example, I get the impression that you have no intention to vote because you feel that neither candidate deserves your vote. Fair enough. But if you fail to vote, then you give tacit approval to the winning candidate, WHOEVER THAT MAY BE, by virtue of the fact that you have failed to indicate who you are against with your vote. And while voting for someone based solely on the fact that "He ain't the other guy" is a pretty poor reason to vote for someone, sometimes its the best that we have available.
When given a choice between bad and worse, it seems to me you have to go with bad and bide your time to find something better, doesn't it?
Obviously, if you have the luxury of being able to wait for another option, that is the best course. It is not always apparent until after the time for decision has passed, however, that there are other options available.