On 6/4/15 11:02 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:05:53 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/4/15 9:44 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 06:49:18 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 6/3/15 9:56 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/3/2015 12:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/nt7nl3k


You crack me up. I am not necessarily "pro" Republican, nor am I
necessarily anti-Democrat. I've stated that before.

I just don't want to see Hillary Clinton as our next POTUS because
I think she is totally unqualified.



She's certainly more qualified than any of the "leading" candidates on
the Republican side, and she's not crazy or hate-filled, as most of them
seem to be.

It is truly sad that the best we have to offer is a Clinton and a
Bush.
We have made politics such an unattractive profession that only the
egomaniacs will even try.
Unfortunately, they are the ones who end up running the government.
Then you wonder why I don't trust the government.



The only presidents I can recall from the onset of my political
consciousness who weren't egomaniacs were Gerry Ford and Jimmy Carter
and, in the latter part of his retirement, Harry S Truman. When I was
working at the KC Star, I had a side job that required me to call Harry
S Truman a few times a year for "comments" and we always had a good
laugh as he found clever ways to avoid the question.*

I trust the large-scale corporate world far less than I do the
government at the local, state, and federal levels. I think most
government agencies at least try to "do the right thing" by the people.
Doing the right thing doesn't seem to be part of the big time corporate
mindset anymore. At least in the good old days, companies paid lip
service to the idea.

Corporations large and small have done more to benefit the people than
government handout programs.


The issue was governmental versus corporate trust. You're raising a
different issue, and the answer to that one is...debatable.