Dennis Miller said one time that (and I am paraphrasing here..unless I nail this quote, then I am quoting him directly...here it goes) "you used to vote for the guy you liked the the most, then people started voting against the guy you disliked, now people just vote for the guy that they disliked the least".
I think it is important that we know alot about the next person that is going to lead our country. But I also think that needs to be tempered with a little bit of common sense. I do not think that we should Any of these people accountable for every vote that they have ever made in the Senate, it is just too impractical. As poor run a campaign as John Kerry had four years ago, I think he got kind of shafted by the whole voting for this, or against that thing.
For example, right now there are 26 bills in Congress relating to defense appropriations. One of the things that people attacked Kerry on was the fact that in his 20 years in the senate he had voted against 150 different defense appropriations bills. Well if we had only 26 defense bills every year, and keep in mind it is only April, then Senator Kerry would have had the opportunity to vote on 520 defense related bills, which means a "yes" vote on 370 of them.
MY point is, these people need to be scrutinized, but maybe if we focused a bit more on what kind of leader they will be, instead of a "perfect" voting record, we would not need to have a year and a half long election, and our government could govern instead of run for office.
I propose a lengthy questionnaire for presidential candidates, with questions like "who would win in a fight, Pacino or DeNiro?" or "What is the first thing you think of when you here the word 'Putin'?" we would find out alot more about these people...
I am accepting questions now.
