i believe that its extremely hard to do one thing without wanting nothing in return, sometimes we do things and say that it was for the good of that person but in the end was only to satisfie ourselves and give us a better feeling like that that action has no moral like kant would put it.
to do things for your countrie yes to try to help in the best way u know how yes but the countrie also should recognize your effort like a boss does with its employees.
And i believe that kennedy would given up his presidency if he thought that was armful to america.nice to hear from u.keep talking.cheers
From: michaelpault <michaelpault@...
Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2009 2:33:21 PM
Subject: [ACWDYG ] the one question:
we like to distract ourselves with lots of unrelated topics when we begin to see things clearly. After all, seeing into the core of a problem, the true problem is often too much for us to handle.
we prefer the endless negative entertainment of good dishonest manipulative debate.
HERE THEN, IS THE ONE QUESTION.
WHICH OF THE PRESIDENTS OF THE LAST 50 YEARS WOULD HAVE GIVEN UP THE PRESIDENCY FOR THE CLEAR GOOD OF THE NATION?
This gets two grades:
A+ for yes...
F- for no...
ok so beginning with Kennedy... NO
Bush 2 NO
how you ask can anyone claim to KNOW such a thing?
It is quite simple. When Gerald Ford assumed the presidency when Nixon resigned, he did something that was strictly for the well being of the country . He pardoned Nixon.
Ahhh the squealing left wing posturing is warming up... BUT BEFORE YOU BEGIN, YOU'RE 100,000,000 PERCENT ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
It wasn't a political debt.
He wasn't pushed into it.
Ford knew and he was right that the continued furor over Nixon would split the nation like a political civil war. He KNEW that only he had the power to stop that.
He disliked and distrusted Nixon, and did it knowing it would destroy his chances at election. The nation would blame Ford for "letting Nixon off the hook". And it did exactly that.
In doing this, however, Ford spent the only capital he had to buy healing for the country. He spent 100% of his political career on
stopping the endless rage between the left and the right over Nixons wrong doings, and he had done wrong.
Only Gerald Ford had the TRUE SUBSTANCE to give up his personal power and use it instead to heal a deep wound in our nation.
He did not posture.
He was not a "rock star".
He was not known as a "thrilling speaker"
No one sang about his brilliance, though his iq was about 135...
He was thought of as dull... because he never tried to impress people
He was considered clumsy... though he was an excellent athlete
His speech was slow... but it was honest and deliberate.
Ford understood not simply in his intellect but in his conscience that the division had to end or the country would suffer for 30, 40, 50 years or more.
He gave up his presidency for that.
who else would have done that?
He didn't try to blind us with the loud glare of empty "charisma"
he was simply and actually there, and he loved the country to move far beyond party, popularity, and personal power...
In our "thinking about politics" we actually rarely think. We are fed buzz words and cute phrases that move our attention and emotions violently this way and that.. We are kept polarized by liars who are obsessed with power but don't give a flying ....... about this beautiful nation of ours.
is that a UTTER CONDEMNATION OF THE WHOLE SHOW.. THE "LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE" CLOWNS WHO CARE NOTHING FOR US OR OUR CHILDRENS FUTURE.
WHAT WE NEED IS A PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS DEVOID OF CHARISMA...
WE NEED PEOPLE WITH SUBSTANCE... TRUE SUBSTANCE AND NOT THE THEATRICAL IMMITATION OF IT..
AND SUBSTANCE IS SO VERY RARE INDEED.
MOVE YOUR MIND PAST POLITICS TO SEE THE REAL STRUGGLE OF UNCONSCIONABLE SWINE FIGHTING IN THE SWILL FOR THE ONLY THING THAT
THEY CARE ABOUT IN THE LEAST...
AND THAT IS THEIR RAW POWER.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]