The election didn't go the way I had hoped. Well, it happens and I will move on with what we have. It will not do any good to cry about it and throw a fit. Ah it's a bitter pill to swallow. Scary to think that Nancy Pelosi will now be third in line to the Presidency. Let that sink in. It's a shame but things will be clogged up for the next two years with the squabbling between the Senate and the House. Politics as usual.
Congratulations to the winners on both sides of the aisle. It is my firm hope that you serve for what you ran for, to the benefit of the people that elected you. Remember the oath of office and the trust placed in you by your fellow Americans. You do owe America your allegiance! If you are unwilling to promote America's interest first, you really have no right to the office to which you have been elected. The people put you in office, the people can also take you out!
In listening to the news reporters touting the winners one thing did stick out. Many of these reporters kept listing the winners as, the first openly gay this, or the first Native American that, and the first Muslim. That's all well and good but the impression I was getting was that they won because of that distinction instead of winning on their merits as a candidate. The idea is that those things should not matter. Isn't that the agenda? In an ideal world none of that would matter at all. For that reason I wonder why those very things are being pointed out as the most important, historic, milestones! Shouldn't those things be a footnote to history? Maybe it's just me, but what I hear is they won in spite of these " handicaps. " It isn't important if they are actually qualified for the position, their platform isn't important, what is important is they are the first. I question if these folks what to be viewed as equals to everyone else, why do they advertise their differences? Look I'm not saying they should be disqualified, I'm not saying they are not equals in every way, I am asking why they promote their differences as an disadvantage? Why are their victories being broadcast as, " in spite of?" Well, because in todays' world it's an advantage to be the victim.
Now I'll be watching what happens with this so called caravan. I won't be surprised if it never reaches our boarder. That distraction is no longer necessary. I'll be very interested to see how the house deals with that should it continue. No doubt it'll be a mess for quite a while.
Congratulations to the winners on both sides of the aisle. It is my firm hope that you serve for what you ran for, to the benefit of the people that elected you. Remember the oath of office and the trust placed in you by your fellow Americans. You do owe America your allegiance! If you are unwilling to promote America's interest first, you really have no right to the office to which you have been elected. The people put you in office, the people can also take you out!
In listening to the news reporters touting the winners one thing did stick out. Many of these reporters kept listing the winners as, the first openly gay this, or the first Native American that, and the first Muslim. That's all well and good but the impression I was getting was that they won because of that distinction instead of winning on their merits as a candidate. The idea is that those things should not matter. Isn't that the agenda? In an ideal world none of that would matter at all. For that reason I wonder why those very things are being pointed out as the most important, historic, milestones! Shouldn't those things be a footnote to history? Maybe it's just me, but what I hear is they won in spite of these " handicaps. " It isn't important if they are actually qualified for the position, their platform isn't important, what is important is they are the first. I question if these folks what to be viewed as equals to everyone else, why do they advertise their differences? Look I'm not saying they should be disqualified, I'm not saying they are not equals in every way, I am asking why they promote their differences as an disadvantage? Why are their victories being broadcast as, " in spite of?" Well, because in todays' world it's an advantage to be the victim.
Now I'll be watching what happens with this so called caravan. I won't be surprised if it never reaches our boarder. That distraction is no longer necessary. I'll be very interested to see how the house deals with that should it continue. No doubt it'll be a mess for quite a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment