Quote:
Originally Posted by RFK1968
The only major difference between the McCain and Obama situations is the one that the religious zealot chooses to make distinct. It is the religious zealot who claims to decide the degree to which an individual's associations should be scrutinized. Intelligent people understand that individuals should be judged based on their own merit, on their own words, and on their own actions. When we start viewing our candidates through the lense of religious ideology, we won't be the same country.
|
Oh and as far as basing ones evaluation solely upon the individuals own personal merit is a tad off. One of the sayings that exists and to me at least is full of hooey is;" first impressions are lasting impression”. How many of us have had, or made an impression that later was turned on its head? A job interview, you screw up, you are a little nervous, you spill something on your tie before going in, etc. does that mean you are a nervous nelly? or that you are a slob? Thats why multiple interviews or giving someone a second look always was and should be prudent. Basing ones judgment of a person solely on one meeting, or one incident is not fair.
And then theres the old saw- judge a king not soley on his own, but by those he surrounds himself with.
If he has advisors who are well spoken, intelligent, fair minded etc. I would say that that is one of 2 things at work here- he gains allegiance from such because they are like minded as they see this man on an everyday basis and are willing to assoc. themselves with him, or see in him the capacity for such, OR they are chosen to fill out weakness’ the man has and seeks expertise in areas which he recognizes as his own weakness’s. In either case I’d say that a viable template to base judgments upon, when judging someone. And no, its not always infallible.