You forgot the not so free press, IMO they are the ones that really control who is and is not elected, and mantra of those. But remember NO politician is your friend, not republican, not democrat, not even libertarians, they are all politicians. The definition of a liar is politician.
I find myself in the quandary of agreeing with both you, WW, and 09. I am in complete agreement with your observation that the press (including the broadcast media) is "not so free". Perhaps it is because the reporters/journalists/newscasters/commentators are at the (nonexistent)mercies of the media moguls - and therefore must forfeit their personal journalistic integrity (assuming they once possessed
any of that), and sing the
company song verbatim in order to maintain their livelihood. True "freedom of the press" can only exist when there is
no censorship authority above the individual, otherwise they are "free" only to express the opinions and desires of their corporate overlords.
As for 09's comment,
That is an awfully broad statement. As such it is false as there is always an exception to every broad rule.
yours was indeed a broad brush... but it only painted
slightly over the lines. It's that
99% of the media and politicians, that give the other
1% a bad name. That remaining 1% is either rendered impotent by "The Boss(es)", or relegated to some obscure and arcane publication, or not appointed to - or removed from - critical committees by the House or Senate "leadership" when they choose to swim against the popular Party tide by doing something that would actually be of
benefit to the American people. There is no sense of altruism in national government, and a large question about how much there is in state governments. Whose
responsibility is it to protect the interests of "We the People"?
CONGRESS! Do they do that? Not that I have noticed.
It saddens me to say, that "The USA Has the Best Government
Money Can buy".
All our representatives in Washington D.C. were wealthy (compared to the average working-class American)
before they became "public servants". Did they spend their own money on their campaigns? No... they raised the
bulk of their campaign money from other, even
wealthier entities - some from private individuals, some from corporations, and some from PACs (man's creative way of
circumnavigating the election laws governing maximum campaign contributions). Do these monied contributors donate out of a moral belief in the prospective legislator? No... they do so with a wink and a nod, and an unspoken (perhaps even spoken) "I (corporate
we) supported your desire today, I/we expect you to support my/our desires when you take office." By the time people ascend the national political ladder, they owe more favors to more
influential people than they can recall. But, they owe
virtually nothing to the worker who contributed $20, $50 or $100 or more from his hard-earned paycheck. The monied individual and corporations have not "donated" anything - they have simply made a different
type of
INVESTMENT! Is there anyone participating in this forum who believes they have enough monied contacts to elevate them to
any national office? A successful bid for elected office at that level requires a "war chest" in the tens of millions of dollars... and money runs with money. What gave me such
silly ideas, you wonder?
“About 47 percent of Congress, or 249 current members are millionaires. … In 2010, the estimated median net worth of a current U.S. senator stood at an average of $2.56 million,” according to the Center’s research.
“Despite the global economic meltdown in 2008 and the sluggish recovery that followed, that’s up about 7.6 percent from an estimated median net worth of $2.38 million in 2009
… and up 13 percent from a median net worth of $2.27million in 2008
. … Fully 36 Senate Democrats, and 30 Senate Republicans reported an average net worth in excess of $1 million in 2010. The same was true for 110 House Republicans and 73 House Democrats.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...aires-a-status-shared-by-only-1-of-americans/
The report, being almost 3 years old, is missing one newly added millionaire, which now brings the total to
250, still "about 47 percent" (0.467289), and the remaining 53 percent are financially
very comfortable (as in: none of them
requires their salary in order to survive).
The day of the elected national official rising from the working-class is long gone. Is it any wonder that those who "serve us" have no sense of the reality of having to labor for one's sustenance? Just my thoughts. :dude: Pax...
