First, one correction... Somehow your mail apparently quotes "Robert 
Rolf", but I am just "Rolf".

I figure you are being somewhat humerous..... but, taking your comments 
seriously, I think the conclusion you draw is disingenuous.

The correct conclusion (the one I intended to convey) is that the naive 
should not vote, and the enlightened should vote to do the least damage 
.... ;-)

Rolf

Juan Garofalo wrote:
> Robert Rolf wrote:
>
>   
>> Anyone who is surprised at the recent revelation of the "facts" should
>> have their voting rights removed.... they simply do not know enough
>> about politics to have the right to vote.
>>     
>
>   
>> political campaigns are based on spite, defamatory
>> conduct, manipulation of information, lying, deception, making
>> impossible promises, and general arrogance.
>>     
>
>
>         Let's see. If you don't realize that politicians are a bunch of
> criminals you should have your 'voting rights' revoked. Fine. I like that.
>         
>         OTOH, if you DO know what politics is about, does it make sense to
> vote for the criminals ?
>
>         So, following your premises (wich I think are 100% correct) if you
> are a fool, you should not vote - if you are clever, you should not vote.
>
>         Does logic and physical evidence contradict government's claims and
> rationale ? 
>
>
>         "O'Brien silenced him by a movement of his hand. 'We control matter
> because
> we control the mind. Reality is inside the skull. You will learn by
> degrees, Winston. There is nothing that we could not do. Invisibility,
> levitation--anything. I could float off this floor like a soap bubble if
> I wish to. I do not wish to, because the Party does not wish it. You must
> get rid of those nineteenth-century ideas about the laws of Nature. We
> make the laws of Nature.'"
>
>
> J.
>
>
>
>
>   

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist