Being Skeptical may not be enough

Submitted by Nick Wiesenfeld (United States), Mar 22, 2005 at 14:31

When I read the following paragraph in the article, I thought to myself that there was something wrong here.

"I like the idea of people running for office. There's a positive effect when you run for office. Maybe some will run for office and say, vote for me, I look forward to blowing up America. I don't know, I don't know if that will be their platform or not. But I don't think so. I think people who generally run for office say, vote for me, I'm looking forward to fixing your potholes, or making sure you got bread on the table."

This statement slaps intelligence in the face. It is also condescending in that it presumes pompous omniscience on his part as well as being so simplistic that I don't see how I can trust anything that the President ever says. He doesn't know more than me or you .. as much as he tries to impress the listener while thinning his lips and evincing a "knowing" smirk.

I shuddered this moment because I found my self thinking that the President won't even correct his usage of the English language and pronounce 'nuclear' correctly. What can we learn from him?

Mr. Pipes .. Please, "skeptical" is not enough. I understand that you are in a position where tact is extremely important. I am not and can feel free to recognize an equine rump when I 'hear' it.

I have a responsibility to be critical of my own actions as well as those of everyone with whom I come in contact. Hopefully, with criticism there will come wisdom too.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".