IT SEEMS the only voters who matter this election season are the “angry voters’’ (“Mass. may lose its clout in House,’’ Page A1, Sept. 26). Here’s my question: Do you only count as a so-called angry voter if you are willing to vote for a lunatic like Christine O’Donnell in Delaware? This is not fair.
I consider myself a card-carrying angry voter. I am angry about wars being started for fake reasons that cause thousands of real deaths; I am angry about an economy that relies on corporate greed, even when it is practically destroyed by that greed, causing untold harm to untold millions; I am really, really angry that every morning I must read about Sarah Palin as if she has the right to matter, as if her dimwittedness is anything more than a cover for the politics of supreme selfishness.
Here are a few things I am not angry about. I am (unlike O’Donnell) not angry about masturbation; I am not angry about immigrants; I am not angry about taxes because I like bridges and schools and national parks.
What makes me the angriest voter of all are candidates who think they must kowtow to a group of loud, obnoxious misanthropes just because that group has a name: “angry voter.’’ I am angry, and I am voting, along with millions of others, for the candidates who do not shame themselves by identifying wretched Tea Party issues as their own for the sake of political expedience.