Some views from the naysayers!
By posting these remarks we received in our mailbox we just earned the right to add a provocative title. Anyway, some of the comments and e-mails we receive make interesting points against our case, most of them don’t. We’ve filtered out the “Bill Gates can’t be a good President because Microsoft is *xxx*” and the “Bill Gates is not a successful business man because Microsoft is *xxx*” crap, and decided feature these arguments:
This is an interesting idea, but completely unrealistic and a little idealistic. If Big Business’s influence in politics is bad, then the biggest man in Big Business who influences not only US politics, but world politics as well, should be just as bad. Politics is not Viral Marketing. ~Susan Adams
You’re suggesting to put the head of Microsoft, that needed the threat of HUGE fines from the EU government to abide by the laws. I’d not want any person who’s leading a company that operates like that anywhere near a position of power. It’s bad enough to see how badly M$ is organized and how restrictive they are. ~Stigu
But seriously folk, although I do like the fact that he’s not going to try to speed up the rapture, I don’t think he has a clue about people who are drastically different from himself. His philanthropy is great, but something makes me think he won’t understand (or has lost touch with) what us broke ass, underdogs are going through. I have had enough of seeing the same old rich, out of touch, White male presidents already, so let’s at least consider thinking outside of the power paradigm for once. ~Vargusvictor
There are many other more respected and worthy people out there, really. ~Steed K
He doesn’t need to be swayed by big business representatives; he IS a big business representative. His beliefs on issues like DRM and IP are clear, and run directly counter to those of many others in the various technology industries. ~Beren
As for Gates: My only concern is loyalty. Do you think he would be more loyal to our country or to businesses like Microsoft. The Gates foundation suggests he might do the right thing, and probably would, but loyalty could still be a concern. Also what party can he run under? The democrats and republicans would never take him, so it would have to third party. Would people still vote for him or would it be seen as a wasted vote? ~Jim
Being rational is good, but a President needs to inspire, too. Jimmy Carter is a fairly rational guy and he gave the country “malaise.” Ronald Reagan was not the most rational guy and he gave us “morning in America.” On the being unselfish point, again there is the Jimmy Carter comparison, great humanitarian, not so good President. And as for management, being President is a lot different than being head honcho at Microsoft. As President, you need to be able to work with Congress and (to a lesser extent) the Supreme Court as fellow powers in the land. When is the last time Bill Gates had to share power with anyone? ~JQ
There were many more arguments for the no-camp, and we’ll surely zoom in on some more of them in the next few days. Until then, feel free to comment on these views by using either the comment system or our discussion board.
2 Responses to “Some views from the naysayers!”
Leave a Reply
Social Bookmarking
Thank you:
Lingerie Blog
Mazda mx-3
Blog-Tique
Sam Farha
Intimissimi
Wicked Weasel
The Daily Treat
Luxury Lingerie Shopping
Beachwear
I’m not so sure about the power sharing issue JQ. Microsoft does make software for Mac OS, and share technology with Apple occasionaly. And let’s not forget that the Xbox 360 has support for the iPod. Bill will share power when he knows that it is nessasary.
Unfortunately there’s no Ctrl-Alt-Del for the country.
That said, Bill would fit right in…
Here’s your 5 minute US.GOV support call:
Citizen: I can’t afford heath care, my kids need a better education, we need to secure the borders, I can’t afford to pay my taxes and feed my family.
US.GOV: Our developers, err, Congress is looking into those problems and are working to have many of those issues corrected in an upcoming release of Government 200X. Other issues will require an upgrade to Constitution, which is possible but will require a support contract.
Citizen: How much is the contract?
US.GOV: $250 Billion for the basic contract. The cost depends greatly on the scope of the revision to Constitution.
Citizen: Whom else can I call?
US.GOV: You’re welcome to contact the developers, err, Congress directly but they will require a support contract as well. On the plus side, they are much more affordable as they are routinely being upgraded. You can get them anytime but you get the most bang for your buck around October during their annual sales drive.
Citizen: I can’t afford a contract. What do I do?
US.GOV: You are free to check our forums. We advise against using the public Internet as the information it contains may not have been filtered for accuracy. Feel free to follow the “Contact Us” link and your questions will be answered in the order they arrive pending authentication of citizenship. please include your Social Sec serial Number as well as the date you purchased your version of Government. If you are using a trial, academic, or otherwise free version of Government, our Global Answers support desk, with offices in India, Pakistan, and China, will handle your questions. Thank you very much for choosing US.GOV for your government needs.
Citizen: Forget this. I’m switching to Open source Government.
US.GOV: Drat! Lost another one to the Libertarians!