Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Strange Days.
If I believed her sincerity re: only wanting to focus on the people of Delaware, I'd be fine with Samantha Stevens not talking to the national media. But her entire existence as a candidate is based upon a national media figure swooping in and anointing her, therein leading to national $upport by people who won't later be able to hold her accountable should she be elected. This is not some grassroots campaign from within a state by an ambitious legislator looking for change for his or her state. I wondered about this very scenario almost a year ago. Are we really okay with this?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Submitting oneself to attempts by carefully scripted individuals whose sole purpose is not to inform but to undermine core values such as one's belief in God by trying to make them appear foolish before millions of viewers is not wise.
Besides you, Xmasttime, who really wants their message twisted, the heart of their platform waylaid by tricky questions designed cast doubt on your credibility? Just like one night's folly can leave you incontinent without your pants on, one lame interview can create a whole mess to clean up...and unless you have all kinds of time on your hands to do that, it can be detrimental and quite annoying for your PR people. Best to read up on and save the debate for later. Ask Bill, he'll tell you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zwdodj2mZ8w
it's called "politics." if she cant handle "tricky questions" or clean up messes, she is getting into the wrong business. her mentor couldnt handle it, and it looks like she doesnt have the onions to even try it. yes, it's be nice if running the country was all puppy dogs and rainbows and praising God, but, unfortunately, its a little trickier than that.
She won't do national media but she'll go on Fox with Hannity, which is local, right? Good grief! How inconsistent, incompetent, and insular are these people?
Post a Comment