John Gruber, in Blazing Fireball pointed out this hysterical passage from a short essay by David Sedaris in the New Yorker Magazine (in their feature, Shouts and Murmurs — !) called simply ‘Undecided’ and I had to quote it as well:
To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. “Can I interest you in the chicken?” she asks. “Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?”
To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.
While I’m a big fan of David Sedaris, he (like most voters whose voting pattern was pre-determined years or decades before the current candidates were nominated) confuses thinking about the important issue of who to vote for (which many undecideds are doing) with not thinking about it (which, by definition, most decideds have stopped doing). My reply to Mr. Sedaris can be found at http://www.undecidedman.com under “Naivite”.
Fair enough. Thanks for the comment, at any rate.
While some people allow hackneyed details to paralyzes their decision making process, in this election there are clear fundamental differences behind the candidate which make this choice an easy one.
Travel writer Rick Steves had David Sedaris on his audio podcast recently telling anecdotes about time spent in France and Japan in his witty, nasally style.