I had posted an entry a while ago about the GOP and the election. This guy sums up what I've been saying: It's not even the specific issues. It's the attitude of the people that run the party. If we saw that attitude anywhere, we'd shoot it down. But apparently, it's okay in electing the person who will be our executive for the next four years? I'd go a step farther than he does. I'd blame that attitude for what we don't like in this administration. Why? Because the attempt we made was tainted and hurt and ... I'd even say 'emasculated' by this attitude. The guy I would have liked to see take the seat was run out of office because the media got a hold of something in his past. True or not ... I'm not going there. I don't think it was, but the point I'm making is that we've elected men with worse histories. We have. He got no support because his ideas went against what fit in the little box. By the end, we were voting for Romney because he was the one that seemed to fit the concept of the box, not because he was the most popular candidate.
I dunno. I'm ranting. My main point is... article, see it? I agree. I agree that we should take a look at what works in our society and go from there. Not in a 'compromise my values' way, but in a 'oh, maybe that's not the same issue we thought it was 40 years ago' way.