I am shocked, SHOCKED I say, that you guys haven't commented on Obamas' 360 on public funding of his general election campaign. Perhaps you are just sick and tired of the whole long, drawn out election process that seemingly has been going on for a couple of years. Oh, right, it has been.
How do the British and French and every other 1st world country elect national leaders in months, when our election cycles take years? I was also thinking yesterday while listening to whatever blow-hard was sitting in for Laura Ingram....(1) what happens to all the money raised by candidates if they don't spend it all? Do they ALWAYS spend it all? Does anyone track that?
(2) Has anyone ever given thought to just how much money gets donated to politicians and what problems/causes could have been eliminated/solved/helped if most of that money would have been directed there, instead of to politicians? From sexy issues such as cancer research or cancer support groups to boring ones like street maintenance or upgraded homeless shelters or food banks or feeding the hungry.
I hate politics so much and have, sadly, reached the point that I no longer believe that anyone, at any level, gets into it "for the public good" or "for public service". They do it for ego, for power, for money. Maybe someone, somewhere does seek an elected office in order to serve, but somewhere along the way, they get corrupted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good topic. I'll write something later. Have had two weeks of 12-18 hr days at work, capped off this weekend by a visit from my mother and MIke's mother. I'll get my life back a bit later in the week. Haven't seen any news, but I was expecting Obama to bag the public funding. (He did, btw, leave wiggle room for this when he made the pledge, at least in the quote I'm familiar with.) I've also missed the FISA fight and the Gitmo decision.
The parliamentary systems are easily the quickest since essentially it is the Speaker who is made chief exec.
Post a Comment