Letter: Lesser of two egos | RecordCourier.com

Letter: Lesser of two egos

To the editor:

Election Day is near. TV is polluted with commercials designed to paint opponents as wrong on the “issues” and catering too much to “special interest groups.” We all know that to get the money to run these campaigns, one must have the backing of some kind of “special interests.” So, how do we make a wise choice with out vote? Here’s a new plan!

Ignore “issues” and look at the egos and tactics of candidates. Look for those with huge egos who feel they know what’s best for us and vote them out! We could change our country for the better within one or two elections. It works at all levels. I shall start at the lowest level and work up.

School Board: I have attended several meetings. I don’t know that much about the current members, but here’s what comes across in their attitudes and tactics. When we parents were speaking out in favor of a calendar that gave our families more time together, only one member, Mr. Brady, seemed to want to hear us. The rest of the board clearly didn’t want to listen. Our words fell on the deaf ears of opinions already set in stone. Another member, Mr. Echan, admitted this recently when he stated, “I’m stubborn, irreconcilable and I won’t listen” (if someone speaks with an opposing view about a certain topic). In other words “I know best what is right for you.”

I don’t know much about Mr. Echan, but if someone is elected by the public, he should listen to the public. During the aforementioned calendar debates, he ridiculed our desire for a family-friendly calendar by reciting an endless list of calendars throughout the history of mankind. We were fighting for our families, he didn’t want to listen, he made fun of us. So, let’s use him as an example of my voting technique Possible pompous ego feels he knows best No vote for you!

In the board’s attempts to keep Randy Green from being elected, they are fighting an obvious fact: Current member Mr. Wallstrum is every bit as “financially interested in a contract made by the board” as Mr. Green would be. They can’t win that argument, so we get to hear their lawyer’s scare tactics, as the R-C reported, “a dismal scenario of canceled insurance policies, fines and legal challenges if Green is elected and tries to serve.” Scare tactics tell me to “throw the whole bunch out”; however, Mr. Brady also was the lone vote against extending the superintendent’s contract. No opinion intended on Ms. Clark here, rather Mr. Brady again was willing to oppose the rest of the board OK, he can stay.

This leads to the next larger group and the push for the business profits tax to fund public schooling. The NSEA sent a “newsletter” arguing their side of the issue, which is fine, but in the “Open Letter to Nevada Businesses” section is a sentence that states that, by having an opposing point of view, businesses “run the risk of being exposed as an opponent of Nevada’s public schools and Nevada’s children.” Here we see a technique used most often lately by the Clinton-Gore wing of the Democratic Party. Disagree, we’ll threaten you and publicly call you anti-children. Hmm threat tactics No vote for you! (Voting this way is much easier!)

Finally, we have Gore vs. Bush. Al carefully crafts his words he didn’t actually claim he invented the Internet he didn’t actually claim he inspired “Love Story,” but he obviously inferred these points to stroke his own huge ego. He childishly sighed, rolled his eyes and interrupted while his opponent spoke in a debate. He is backed by the same loud, rude, interrupting TV mouths that clinton gave us (remember James Carville?). Are we really going to subject ourselves to more of these egos and not-quite-lies just because Al loves his wife and Bush didn’t know the president of Unknownistan? No one flinched when Gore had to ask who a bust of George Washington was while on a video taped tour of Monticello!

Bush says that if he loses, it’s not the end of the world. Gore threatens we’d better elect him or face the destruction of the economy that Bill (Gates, not Clinton) built. (Anyone out there lost money in the stock market recently? Anyone remember the current administration’s assault on Microsoft?)

Some obviously care more about reversing society’s slow spiral into the abyss than about personal power. It is apparent in their actions and in their modest demeanors. If, at every level, we would simply vote for the “lesser of two egos,” we’d be far better off as a society. We may miss on one or two, but in general, if you elect a giant-ego into office at even the lowest level, he’ll be back as Senator or worse, with his hand in your wallet and his “knowledge of what’s best for you” in your nightmares.

Doug Reynolds


Oct. 25