There are all forms of terrorism.  One kind was exhibited in the murder of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan. At the same time, a bomb was set off killing a score of political supporters.  This was a political statement and was a form of voting.  Scare the opposition by threat of or actual killing.  It works.

Frustration in democracies, witness to this action, kicks in with – “It can’t happen here.”  But it does happen here. It happens here all the time. The word is often mightier than the sword because lies and distortions in political situations are acts of terrorism.  It is easy to understand that some activists get carried away and pick up minor defects and blow them up to become major issues to dishonor an opponent.  Such activities have the effect of shouting “FIRE” in a theater and causing costly harm to humans and property.  The sneakier and craftier the ploy, the greater the effect on people’s thinking and this makes up their mind – the “where there is smoke there must be fire” kind of conclusion.

What is often the reality is simply “he says, she says” differences and because when the competition boils down to this level it should be a warning for voters that they should look to other candidates.  Unfortunately, have you looked at what the present roll-call of candidates have been caught saying about each other?  It is just too bad that the Democrats are “dissing” Democrats while the Republicans are similarly bad-mouthing other Republicans.  What is a voter to do?

Claims by any candidate to possession of the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven should be immediately dismissed.  However, several are promising voters that they have been touched by the hand of God and therefore are spokesmen for the Deity. This brings up the question of who is right?  Can both be right?  Or, can there be a multiplicity of truths?

I was impressed by the obituaries of Benazir Bhutto in the papers and television reports.  She was eulogized as being a “flawed” person who was definitely on the right track by being democratically inclined.  Is there any candidate in the upcoming American election process who is not flawed?  I do not think so.  If we get into a contest of comparing the severity and number of flaws in each, will we make do by choosing the one with the least flaws?  In a democracy, this might be possible if we go quietly to the balloting places and, upon reflection on the vagaries of human life, cast our vote.  The sad thing is that many good people will not be elected because of human frailties.  Choosing the one with the least flaws is settling rather than making the right choice.  Time will tell. But, fear should not be part of the process.