[Grovenet] Fw: 545

[Allen Warren]

Depends who you ask.  :-)
 
Allen Warren


________________________________
From: Steven <NoSpam03 at comcast.net>
To: Forest Grove local interests list <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 8:05:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Fw: 545

The other thought is, Could it be any worse?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
> Behalf Of Allen Warren
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 2:50 PM
> To: Tosca at prodigy.net; Forest Grove local interests list
> Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Fw: 545
>
>
> Okay . . . let's say I take Door #3 and run for office . . .
>
> Does my background, over 25 years in the engineering profession with roles
> where I managed others as well as roles where I was a Program Manager
> leading a team, does this background make anyone feel comfortable that I
> have the skills to be a good representative in Congress to those
> who elected
> me?
>
> I have zero experience in politics.  Is this an asset or liability?
>
> Today, I don't know the first thing about our Congress'
> procedural process. 
> Is this an asset or liability?
>
> I'm not registered in any political party.  Is this an asset or liability?
>
> Let's say I really did run for office . . . if by some miracle I actually
> *WOULD* win, I can almost guarantee I'd be viewed by my fellow
> Congress-people as the proverbial floating feces in the punch bowl.  Would
> this be an asset or liability to the folks who elected me to
> representative
> them?
>
> Charley Reese expresses frustration and outrage.  I relate.  His
> options #1
> & #4 are basically 'do nothing'.  His option #2 is tough
> because unless we get a massive, one-time turnover, we very well could end
> up with the entranched masses brain-washing the "new kids" and
> then we have
> essentially no change.
>
> In summary, it's option #3 that has the most potential.  But can it really
> happen?  Would we really all support it?
>  
> Allen Warren
>