A friend posted a link to a video of you saying that you didn’t know what you said, but you stand by it.
Do you not consider this a dangerous statement and philosophy of life? As if everything you say were golden, never to be re-examined in a different light?
God fear the ignorant who see only one perspective. Thus the problem with polemic pundits and politicians (pardon the alliteration), who batter and berate us with abuses of language (e.g. the former prose herein), who propogandize through a limited perspective that can’t take in other ideas! Where is there room for democracy in such a person? Where is the opportunity for dialogue?
Real journalists and those who consume their work want dialogue, not scripts, and they certainly don’t want “ditto what I said before,” especially when you don’t remember exactly what you said. What if it was, in a moment of frustration, “Jeez, that guy’s a real prick”? Or “I wish I were dead”? [a metaphor to ponder later …]
I remember one thing you said recently (among oh so many objectionable statements): you said that the U.S. under Obama is headed down the path of California and our gigantic state debt and high taxes. What you didn’t say is that in 2007, your outgoing year as governor, Massachusetts was $10,481 in debt per capita (up from $7,500 when you became governor in 2003), while California had $3,140 per capita debt. In 2010, Massachusetts had the highest state debt per capita in the nation. Please look at that phrase: per capita = considering the number of people in the state. California’s debt is large because it is large and quite populated (38.4 million), unlike your puny (6.6 million) Massachusetts (in which I lived for six years). How y’all managed to rack up $11,800 per person in debt by 2012 is what should be held up as a doomsday scenario. This year California will have an estimated $3,500 in debt per person, nearly a two-thirds lower debt per person than Massachusetts. It would also be down from the figures for 2010, when California state debt was approximately $4,000 per person.
Granted, comparatively, California was 18th highest in the nation in state debt in 2010, and the following year, 6th highest, so yes, there has been a steep decline in terms of other states’ recovery from the recession. But with a larger population, when there is a national unemployment crisis and a subsequent drop in state income tax revenues, California had to borrow more to pay more unemployment benefits, among other issues, of course. But let me make it simpler for you: Drop in tax revenues = more debt. More unemployed people, but fewer taxes = more debt.
In any case, your metaphor demonstrates a very limited perspective that distorts the lens through which you present the situation. People like things simplified for them, so you have your appeal with the masses. But you don’t stay true to the big picture, nor apparently open to reconsidering things you may or may not have said, but you don’t recall. None of which are qualities I’d want to see in a president.
Please withdraw your candidacy immediately on the grounds that you cannot be accountable for your own statements.
In hope for a more accurate, compassionate future,
a teacher of those who will create our future
[long after your hypothetical desire for death becomes more than metaphor]