DesideriScuri
Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery In this case, that "PC" label is more accurately a valid concern about his ability to fairly serve part of the public. Unless you are in that political subdivision, that doesn't concern you. If he isn't your elected official, he can't represent you, can't serve you, and you have no say in his worth as a representative. Should he have used that word? That all depends on what he meant. If he meant all the word implies, then, yes, he should have used that word. If he didn't mean what that word implies, then, no, he shouldn't have used that word. It doesn't matter whether you or I agree with him. It's what he meant that matters. And, I'd rather someone state their actual beliefs, no matter who is going to get pissed off, so we know where that person stands. Can an elected official who holds beliefs diametrically opposed to those held by a group of people fairly serve the constituents within that group?
_____________________________
What I support: - A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
- Personal Responsibility
- Help for the truly needy
- Limited Government
- Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
|