From today's Issues Forum:

I'd love to say I am voting for Susan, but the holier-than-thou arrogance
of her and her shadow (why their marriage is an issue is beyond me; a rubber
stamp is a rubber stamp no matter which ink pad they rest on for the night)
are a bit much to take. I am sorry, but when someone says they are going to
make things better, and can't tell you one iota of their program, I feel a
bit like the guy sitting in church listening to the preacher.
Of course, once you die, it's too late to ask for a refund.

Over the last couple of weeks, I am increasingly (but not totally) swayed by
the conviction that Susan is conducting a "stealth candidacy," the program
of which will become clear only after (if?) she is elected. This is the sort
of candidacy that frontrunners run when they want to coast.

And for all the whining about how much this campaign has cost her
personally -- as it undoubtedly has -- can anyone honestly name one GM or
IM, apart from the genuine world champions, who has profited more from
chess?

It would be so much better if we were spared the Joan of Arc scenario and
the self-trumpeting martyrdom it necessarily entails. Anyone who quotes JFK
and Dr. King in a speech, as Susan did in Texas, must indeed be on the side
of whatever angels there may be. But that doesn't mean they should be taken
on faith. That, essentially, is what we are being asked to do.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---