It is hard to fathom how the bulk of the Dem voters could be anything but "low information". If they weren't low information voters, they wouldn't vote for progressive solutions for essentially anything. Esp. not fixing the economy, esp. mired in the longest downturn/lack of recovery in most of our lifetimes. We are in the 6th year of Obamanomics, and 1Q GDP just got adjusted into negative territory. Last election, we were already 4 years into the Obama Recession, and yet, more people ignored that and voted for 4 more years of the same, or worse, than voted for sane economics.
You also have to be pretty low information to believe these days that the government, and, esp. the federal government can solve any real problems facing this country. You have to ignore all the government failures, including shipping guns to the Mexican cartels, throwing millions out of their health insurance (who liked their plans and doctors, and lost both), VA administrators getting millions in bonuses for essentially killing thousands of veterans, Benghazi, trading our top 5 terrorists at Gitmo for a guy who walked off his post, and is likely a deserter, an out of control, above the law, IRS, etc. The government is run for the benefit of the government employees, politicians, and for the fat cats who can get either sweetheart deals, or can get protection from competition. The last people the government looks out for are the taxpayers (esp. with illegals apparently getting better health care than our veterans).
Please explain to me how a high to moderate information voter could vote for any of that.
Hear hear! And I'll add that I include many otherwise well-educated people under the rubric of "low-information voter." I have seen -- time after time -- oodles of well-educated boobs who are otherwise ignorant of how middle America thinks and what drives the culture which has blessed us (until recently) with a strong defense.
80 comments:
I like the concise and cogent summary in the second paragraph of the quote.
1. What "second paragraph"? No paragraph marks here.
2. Bruce Hayden was a secret commenter crush of mine.
3. Well, actually, Bruce Hayden just started moving to "was" as opposed to "is," on account of his awkward, lazy, "...it is hard to fathom..." thing. I always thought he was more rigorous than that. No doubt the fault lies with me, in my faulty thinking about him!
---
Let me just repeat, because as you all know it's always necessary (even though I do not agree that it should be), I did not vote for President Obama in either 2008 or 2012 (hell, I didn't even vote for President Clinton in either of his presidential elections.).
Not that it should matter. But some how it does. OK, I say.
At this point: LOL.
Oh, *snort*. Ever shifting sands = nothing on which to stand. Ain't that the truth./?
Let me make it perfectly clear:
If, in fact, something is hard to fathom, I would say that's a demand to work harder to fathom it.
I am not saying that it's a call to agree with it, to be clear (yet another thing one must always say, just because, as you all know, it's always necessary). What I am saying is this:
Let me make it perfectly clear:
If, in fact, something is hard to fathom, I would say that's a demand to work harder to fathom it.
Referring to political party that is catch basin for the slave-minded; you can free the slave from the plantation but you cannot take the plantation out of the slave. Their powerful innate inseparable misplaced loyalty does not allow it. That is why they are impossible to speak to. Impossible to have a sincere discussion on any political subject.
I keep thinking of the cab driver that responded when I wanted to see the scope of tea party protesting IRS here in Denver. It was a blowout.
I could have easily driven myself but I wanted a chance to study the scene as passenger not as driver.
The cab driver responded much faster than I anticipated. The phone rang just as I was exiting my apartment to wait downstairs. Damn, that was fast. It was the driver asking, "Do you have a walker?"
This caused massive confusion just as I was walking through my door. How did he know about that? Do they keep records or what? Did I use Yellow cab when I used that thing? Why is he asking? I did not understand the question. I hadn't used a walker in in years. I have a hate relationship with that thing. It's only here because you never do know. Fuck. What a question!
"No. Why are you asking about that?"
"Because I have a bad back and cannot lift heavy things such as suitcases."
Confused, I very nearly walked out without locking the door. Just because of his lazy ass.
In short order I revealed the reason I was driving a loop and returning with such simple purpose.
He engaged politically. Turns out a very political-minded person. Wrong about everything. Eventually his nonsense became too much when he said, "Tea partiers just don't want to pay any taxes." He mischaracterized them completely. I challenged that presumption. Then he said, "Republicans are all liars. I don't listen to a single thing any Republican says."
)))Slam((( End of political conversation. I'm talking to an idiot. A plantation dweller. Another fucking moron. Resolutely thick.
"Hey, did you see that boat?" We had just passed the Brown Palace. (look closely, there is a ship in the window.)
"What?"
"I asked if you saw that ship in the window."
I have a few of such boats around here. Very nice wooden models. They catch my interest. How's that for a segue, eh?
So it goes.
It isn't just this Administration, which is gloriously incompetent, but the fact that, for the past 40 years, government has had a vested interest in making things worse instead of better and keeping people apart instead of bringing them together (the community organizer's sorcery) because the Left has dominated in this country for 80 years and wants to stay in power* at all costs that only low-info (and the willfully ignorant) voters would keep believing their promises.
Leftists like to quote Einstein as saying insanity is defined as doing the same thing repeatedly, but expecting a different result.
That's not insane. It is, however, the definition of stupid.
* At last report, there were 7 million voters in 28 states who are registered to vote in more than 1 state. And this doesn't even count CA, NY, or TX.
Bruce is an astute commenter, one of the best.
Not hard to fathom at all.
Romney's 47% + IRS suppression + voter fraud = VIC TOR REE
The 47% aren't hard to understand either. And they are not all or even most of them low information.
A good 5% are just plain evil. Alinsky Cloward-Piven Marxist evil assholes.
The remainder are just stupid.
'Invincibly ignorant', as the nuns used to say.
They cannot reason from the facts before them. They need the Gubmint Media to tell them what all those little numbers mean.
So a stagnant (or falling GDP) + no new jobs = Booming economy.
They do not believe their own eyes. Like Chip's taxi driver, unwilling to think beyond a few heuristics, long worn smooth.
Full fathom five our forefathers lie;
Of their bones were freedoms made;
Those pearls that were ideals
Nothing of them doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something poor and strange.
Yes, Chip, but the informed voters mostly are the equivalent of house slaves.
The most fascinating occurrence would be everyone voting their incumbents out. But that's no guarantee the noobs wouldn't be bought off just as easily.
And then there's the old-line GOP.
Thad Cochran got re-elected by Democrats voting in a GOP primary.
A one-party state, that's what we are.
It's not easy, thinking of yourself as executive material, when you're not even management, when you're not even on staff, when you're not even working on the production line.
Here's Theodore Dalrymple on the current values of the British underclass, also describing Romney's 47%:
"Certainly the notions of dependence and independence have changed. I remember a population that was terrified of falling into dependence on the state, because such dependence, apart from being unpleasant in itself, signified personal failure and humiliation. But there has been an astonishing gestalt switch in my lifetime. Independence has now come to mean independence of the people to whom one is related and dependence on the state.
Mothers would say to me that they were pleased to be independent, by which they meant independent of the fathers of their children — usually more than one — who in general were violent swine. Of course, the mothers knew them to be violent swine before they had children by them, but the question of whether a man would be a suitable father is no longer a question because there are no fathers: At best, though often also at worst, there are only stepfathers. The state would provide. In the new dispensation the state, as well as television, is father to the child."
In order to drag that old carcass Thad Cochran across the finish line -the democrats used the bogus scare tactic (that only the very stupid believe) "If you vote for the other guy he will not let blacks vote".
Now that the Thad will face a democrat in Nov - will the leftwing machine use that lie against Thad?
So much to respond to and no time. But briefly:
I looked through the Romney/Ryan economic plan in 2012. The best that could be said about it was that it wasn't Obama's plan. That's an extremely low bar.
Second, a great deal of Obama's economic policy is the same as W's policy, namely bail out the super rich and screw everyone else. (Policies at the Fed have been consistent since Reagan appointed Greenspan. The big bank bail out was initiated by Bush. And so on and so on.)
Third, hard to see a difference in the parties on immigration, as both are pushing for amnesty. Occasionally Republican voters get prissy but it never changes the party outlook. (I saw this morning that Pelosi was rhapsodizing about how good W was on immigration. That tells you everything you need to know.)
Finally, the math for Republicans looks awful, and it is by their own choice. If you write off 47% of the electorate and tell them to drop dead, then you are going to need to win almost 94.4% of the remaining votes to win a majority. That's not a winning electoral strategy.
One thing to remember, it was probably worse when Mencken wrote nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
If you know much about the Gilded Age, this is the second go-round, but without the prosperity.
Thad is toast. The tactic of getting black democrats to vote for him in the Republican primary against the Tea Party candidate AND accusing (implying that) the rest of the Tea Party are a bunch of racists is the only reason he won.
Come November, none of those Democrats are going to vote Republican. Hardly any of the Tea Party is going to vote for Thad.
So. In order to crush the Tea Party, the old line RINOs have given away the Senate seat in Mississippi.
As to low informed "voters".....I've come to the conclusion that the American public in general is basically stupid, uneducated, uncaring and blase about almost everything. It is on purpose. The government wants them that way.
A long time ago, at midnight, at a crossroads in the Mississippi Delta, Robert Johnson made a deal with the Devil. He sold the Devil his soul and in exchange the Devil taught Johnson how to play the blues. A few years later Johnson was dead.
Thad, bless his heart, has sold his soul and made his deal. We'll see how it works out.
There is a resentment aspect to those who vote Democratic. I have friends who worked construction union jobs all their lives, will get lifetime pensions of $40-$50K per year, have tax sheltered union annuity accounts worth $400K or more, will get social security of $2K per monrh or more, own thire home free and clear, have investment or second homes and don't get that they are part of the 1% in terms of their own net worth. So they resent those like Romney who have more than they do. They don't get that the Dems are destroying the ability of the next generations to get where they are.
And I agree with Icepick- Ryan and Romney and the Repubs had no big ideas or big plans to address our economic stagnation which requires a big does of optimism and of freedom by letting people keep more of their own money which gives people more incentive to work hard and make more money and biggest of all to take risks and start businesses and hire people.
It's a religion, or a cult if you prefer since God has nothing to do with it and Me is the central object of worship. Ergo, it doesn't have to make sense but must be defended at all costs. Also, the smarter you are, the easier it is to talk yourself into things. Also, they're not that smart and/or their critical thinking skills have withered or never developed due to living in an echo chamber for so long.
Most of the people in my family are "progressive" liberals. Also, they are far from stupid. The three who are professors are so invested in it that you can't argue with them. They refuse. The one in my generation pretends not to hear or says reasonable minds can disagree etc. without offering any substantive response (then snarks behind my back). The two in the older generation become so livid and emotional that they preclude argument even before it starts. These are smart people but they are NEVER exposed to alternative points of view. Their only knowledge of alternative points of view is filtered through the media so they can believe that alternative points of view are "extremist," "racist," whatever stigma they want. This gives them an excuse to continue being followers in the Church of the Sacred Bleeding Heart of Me.
Ryan and Romney and the Repubs had no big ideas or big plans to address our economic stagnation
What?
AJ @ 12:24. Resentment and rage are everything. One of those professors I was just talking about told me he "resented" that his state was publishing the percentage of tax dollars allocated to state employee pensions. He's been in "public service" for 40 years and he's earned his pension and he resents that being questioned. That college tuition costs have skyrocketed as well as taxes and that non-tenured faculty are abused wage laborers-that's just the way the system works! (Apparently, all those Facebook quotes he posts about "change" that is coming to America have to do with Other People.)
Chip - I don't disagree with the idea that they had a plan and that it was big.
The linked document is way too big and styled too much like a "Deck" you get from an MBA for a business deal.
They needed to condense their plan down to one stinking page and they could not and did not. We need to totally re-structure fed spending and fed govt and they still don't seem to understand that.
It is interesting what one encounters - one guy at market was declaiming in a loud voice that those damn Jews are all going to get what's coming to them - Israel is going to be nuked and won't that be swell! He said that we need to kill 6 million Jews every so often just because we can. Because Palestine. Who knows - he is college educated, successful, by any measure, rich, and blind to his own hatred.
Yet another person wrote on Facebook that he thinks that members of the Bush administration should be tortured in the most painful ways imaginable. Went into detail about what should be done to them. Yeah, that's pretty cutting edge - torture people who are out of power because you are stuck living in a slum. How very 2007!
My response? In the first case, stunned silence - that guy is a loud mouth and loves to denounce anyone who disagrees with him as "racist republicans!". Now I will avoid him whenever I see him.
The second is simpler - just change my will and make sure that anyone who loves the OWS movement and wants to torture people for their politics will never see one dime of my estate.
Beyond that - what's the use - people are stupid and becoming increasingly more stupid by the day it seems.
Amartel - he is frightened that Joe Taxpayer will learn that the professor paid in maybe 5-7% of his pay and is getting a very generous, lifetime pension that is equal to or damn near to his most recent annual salary. And Joe Taxpayer may see a lightbulb go off in his own head ans think "hey I and my employer have been paying 12% into soc security my whole working life".
Let's face it - it is a pension lottery -some picked the right secure govt job and most didn't. Your relative should be happy he is one of the winners- he has no reason to be man- I don't fault him- I fault the system right?
AJ, I think the Repubs did put out single-page versions of their plans. The problem was that the Dems put out a single-cartoon version of their plans: Paul Ryan pushing grandma off a cliff.
"These are smart people but they are NEVER exposed to alternative points of view."
Oh, you've BEEN to Madison, then?
AJ-no shit! Also afraid of looking in the mirror and see a hypocrite. Boo!
Chip S. is exactly right re that cartoon.
For anyone interested, Paul Ryan did provide a summary of the Republican plan in the WSJ in 2011 -- The GOP Path to Prosperity
He listed the major components as reducing spending, welfare reform, health and retirement security, budget enforcement, and tax reform. Clear and concise.
Chip S., the bulk of the Republican plan in 2012 was to cut taxes, raise spending on big items, cut spending on little items, and then the budget would balance itself because we would magically sustain growth rates over 5% for years on end because ROMNEY!
That wasn't much of a plan. It fact, it was every bit as stupid and egotistical as Obama's belief that his election would usher in global peace and the end of global warming just because he was Obama.
Yeah, perfect example of lowly information people: the anti-Israeli left, which BTW includes a great many people of Jewish background if not faith. Never again, my aunt Fanny and also my uncle Manny. All logic and reason falls away in a mad rush to have the heart in the right (left) place and say anything, however deceitful, that will delegitimize Israel (and legitimize the grotesquely obviously infinite fail of every other nation in the region).
I don't agree that most Americans are stupid or uncaring. But I do think most are not well informed about a lot of what's happening in the world of politics and finance. That’s because most are very busy people, working hard to keep it all together in this crazy, hectic, modern world of ours. If they manage to grab a half hour of nightly news that's doing pretty good, and we know how biased that is.
Somewhat disagree. These sort of attitudes don't develop in the midst of productive busy lives. The broken media and educational systems channel 24/7 leftard, yes, but also there are fewer and fewer people actively engaged in real income-generating work, much less self-sustainably employed. That leaves even more time to wallow in leftard theory and justifications.
That's kind of what I was thinking - people spend a lot of time on sites like Kos and watching MSNBC and the comedy channel - they are paying attention and learning, but everything they encounter is anti-American and somewhere left of Stalin.
What border crisis? What's a deficit? ISIS? What's that? They know stuff, but are willfully ignorant about the facts in the world.
They may not be low info, perhaps just wrong info voters.
The young guy who works at the 711 down the street is pretty smart and he had no clue about the illegal invasion but he was aware of the Iraq fiasco which is getting some MSM coverage vs. the illegal invasion which is barely mentioned or reported.
A young doctor was just raped in Philly by an illegal immigrant and the newspaper reported they asked ICE to comment but no call back yet. His employer claimed he had all the right paperwork and he was living in a downtown home with 7-10 other Mexicans. The paper learned [how I don't know] that the perp had been deported in 2013 but was now back. No word on why he was deported.
Last month, a longtime illegal pled guilty to raping, beating and partially blinding a 58 year old woman in Philly. He had been here for at least ten years. She testified at trial he had ruined her life. He blamed his actions on booze.
Who are our elected representatives really representing?
As I've moved through time, I've become more conservative. This phenomenon is true of most people. Perhaps the future is not so bleak as it now looks, or maybe not. No one in FDR's New Deal coalition noticed that the Depression just went on and on and on........Some one hundred years later many Democrats notice that Woodrow Wilson was a white supremacist. I'm sure that given a few generations many Democrats will recognize that Obama was incompetent and erratic. You just have to be patient.
Yes, Chip, but the informed voters mostly are the equivalent of house slaves.
So it goes.
Bruce is an astute commenter, one of the best.
Exactly. That's why I'm calling him out, Deborah.
---
Man, this reminds me of a Twitter thing from several years ago.
I've never forgotten it, because it taught me a lot, so profoundly informative was that.
Deleted and reposted only to correct a writing issue. If anyone doubts that, I will post again the orginal (assuming it's in my gmail).
---
As I've moved through time, I've become more conservative. This phenomenon is true of most people. Perhaps the future is not so bleak as it now looks, or maybe not. No one in FDR's New Deal coalition noticed that the Depression just went on and on and on........Some one hundred years later many Democrats notice that Woodrow Wilson was a white supremacist. I'm sure that given a few generations many Democrats will recognize that Obama was incompetent and erratic. You just have to be patient.
I note with interest that you wrote "conservative" as opposed to "Conservative."
Well, of course people get more "conservative" as they get older. People want to conserve what they already have and of course that impulse increases over time; it's not as if they're young and starting out and therefore that they have all of that time ahead of them.
Human nature is a powerful thing.
FTR, I found a particular thing about Brat very striking, remarkable and admirable. Do you know what it was?
@rcommal: I left you some comments at Althouse; I hope they get through.
@r,l: The first one was on point for Althouse but the second more properly belongs here. If it posts, I'll cut and paste it here for continuity.
FTR, Lem's does not remind me at all of Twitter.
So. In order to crush the Tea Party, the old line RINOs have given away the Senate seat in Mississippi.
So. In order to make a point, tea partiers from all around this great nation worked to nationalize a senate race in Delaware back in 2010, pouring money into support for, of all people, Christine O'Donnell, and they won.
Not only did they choose O'Donnell, they actively worked to discredit Castle in every and any way they could.
Most important of all, they advocated for--by demonstration, by modeling--the belief that all politics is national. In other words: Politics is local no more.
That notion has won the day more broadly, following the year in which the nail finally was put into the coffin of locality.
At least, for me. (I finally realized that I was an outlander.)
FTR, Lem's does not remind me at all of Twitter.
FTR, Lem's doesn't remind me at all of Twitter, either, chickelit.
However, certain interjections and exchanges herein do.
I learned to despise the Eastern elite "intellectual" circles at an early age -- and for very good reason.
Chickelit:
I wrote, specifically, "a twitter thing."
You transformed that into "twitter" as a generality and then responded as if I had done so. But I didn't, chickelit. You did.
I learned to despise the Eastern elite "intellectual" circles at an early age -- and for very good reason.
Oh, heh.
I'm as Midwestern as you are, sir, and perhaps more so.
Check yourself.
Politics is local no more.
Yes, beginning with Sarah Palin, the eastern elites started character smears -- "harass sarah" -- which caught on nationwide. This had little to do with O'Donnell, and arguably less with Republicans. I blame the Sullivanists and that ilk, first and foremost
O'Donnell was not witch-hunted. I call bullshit. She was a poor choice, full stop. She had no track record of competence in anything, much less anything that would fit her for national office. Also, she had precisely zero scruples in terms of making shit up in order to destroy someone else.
Bachmann is a different case. She did, and does, have a record of competence and she is, and was, an individual of achievement. Her local constituency elected her over time. I do not seek to take way that from her, in any way.
That said, to state it plain: No, I did not think, and I do not think, that she's a candidate for national office, and, more, I do not consider her fit for national office.
Have I made the distinctions clear enough for you?
You transformed that into "twitter" as a generality and then responded as if I had done so. But I didn't, chickelit. You did.
When I wrote "Twitter," I meant genus (think Venn diagram) encircling Twitter and all things Twitter. I guess I should have written no aspect of Lem's -- interjections et al. -- remind me of Twitter. They are mutually exclusive circles. (well except for the apparent fact that Lem tweets -- which I rarely see :)
O'Donnell was not witch-hunted. I call bullshit.
Have I made the distinctions clear enough for you?
No. Full stop. And I would have to revisit the written record at the time to convince myself otherwise. Do keep in mind that I'm not lumping you with the sullivanists who reacted nationwide in lockstep against O'Donnell. I do recall disagreeing with your opinion of O'Donnell at the time, however, I always listen to what you say about DE and NJ politics.
Chickelit:
As well you know, I never attacked Sarah Palin. I did not.
That said, I disagree: The move toward nationalizing local races and the smearing of individuals in local races did not start there, when Sarah Palin became the nominee for vice-president.
The move toward nationalizing local races and the smearing of individuals in local races did not start there, when Sarah Palin became the nominee for vice-president.
It sure as heck dropped down to that, when outsiders drove her from Alaskan office.
I do remember you tying some significance to the DE race and the "start" of nationwide meddling in local state politics -- correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm off now -- out like a light to begin afresh tomorrow.
I'm not sorry to say that if it's true that the record will show that you were a supporter of O'Donnell, no doubt I did, in some way, leak my opinion of your judgement in that particular, specific case.
---
Also, I would suggest that you no longer suggest that you'd give even a single fig for my opinion on either Midwestern politics, in general (much less specifically) or in terms of DE/NJ (or PA/MD) ones, either. I've been honest about many things, and I've been unafraid to issue caveats and to cut loose politicians on account of the caveats I issued. I've been willing to be considered disloyal, if and when necessary.
Zoom me if you must. But know that I know what you're doing.
I do remember you tying some significance to the DE race and the "start" of nationwide meddling in local state politics -- correct me if I'm wrong.
No, I won't, because yes, I did. I do dispute your "start," however.
Thanks for calling attention to Bruce Hayden's great comment, Bruce.
I like "lowly informed" better than "low informed". Is it a double? :)
Palin made herself a national figure when she ran for national office. Afterwards there was much talk of her running for national office again. That's going to spotlight her. And she wouldn't have been chased from office if she hadn't quit. That's all on her.
As for nationalizing local and state races: that happened long ago in the only way that matters, which is money. It's just become more open lately.
And to show what a reactionary I am, I still think the popular election of Senators is a horrible practice.
The GOP establishment is not going to save us. It's going to save itself and its cronies. Cantor's siphoning money away from Brat's campaign. Cochran put a safe seat into potential contention by refusing to bow out gracefully. Akin did the same thing. Vote for the GOP establishment only when there's no other viable candidate. These Tea Party candidates, mainly women I note, that everyone now laughs about ...? How bad were they really? Palin's decision to quit was due to political lawsuits and practical reality. She saved her state a lot of money by leaving. The right thing to do since she's been so thoroughly lied about that her reputation will never been rehabilitated. Might as well be a symbolic figure. Bachmann's quit was honorable as well. I wish more of them would do that; get out before they become entrenched and beholden. O'Donnell I don't know but it's very strange that it only takes ONE joking comment and everyone flees the ship for fear of being associated with a "witch." What a bunch of wussies! And look at the human detritus that gets automatically elected and re-elected by the Democrats.
What Amartel said.
Thanks, Darcy!
My Althouse comment that I said I'd post here:
chickelit said...
@rcommal: You seem compelled to "call out" people you otherwise like. I appreciate this because it reminds me of good parenting. I, on the other hand, like to call out people with whom I disagree or otherwise dislike. Maybe it's my zodiac sign.
6/26/14, 11:06 PM
I, on the other hand, like to call out people with whom I disagree or otherwise dislike.
Yes, I know, being one of them. It just took me a long to realize it, you skillful zodiac sign, you.
One of my favorite comedy bits ever, and most especially because it reminds me of my very favorite fable of all time, from early childhood and readership.
Name that fable, is my challenge.
; )
: /
It's true that I don't see a lot of point in knocking about, bagging about, spending a lot of time in engaging with or attacking folks I don't like and with whom I disagree. (I accept that many people, including a whole number of people I like and/or etc., do.) One of the reasons that I don't see a lot of point in that is that, from my POV, inevitably that mindset of "attack is always best" leads to bleed-over against others who are not actually part of the enemy. In other words, attacking becomes a habit of not just action, but also mind.
And don't I know it?
Ref'ing to the vid I linked:
"Great. Let's go."
To this day, because that combination of three words do happen to occur quite frequently enough in the real world having nothing to do with the specific reference, I get to chuckle (at least internally) a lot. Life is like that. It goes as it goes.
"Sickness."
Oh, man, baby. You bet!
Darcy: Never have I considered you lowly, FTR.
Amartel:
Aww.
In which we discuss how much we like cocoa puffs.
"But he isn't wearing anything at all!"
Is another toss-out that occurs to me and at which I chuckle.
Originally, I thought of that as an additional hint, but there's no point in that. Instead:
"The Emperor's New Clothes" was my very favorite fable and fairy tale from earliest childhood, which is not to say there weren't significant others nudging up against that.
What can I say? The message resonated, even then.
Troop: To this day I still think you are decidedly not crazy as an individual.
However cuckoo I might find you when you insist on bringing up the likes of cocoa puffs as an argument or whatever, and however alarming I do find it that over time you've encouraged people to be more serious than you, in fact, are.
---
Then there's that whole thing when you just get to do, say, create, trash, zap, zoom, zip, whatever, and without consequence, yet still you work hard against the notion that other people are no less deserving of "just get to do... ... ... & etc." than you. It's a noteworthy thing. Manifestly, you don't have to note that. You do not. That said, and specifically because so, why do you choose not to?
Is this why you choose not to?
Post a Comment