Ever get the feeling that all of our elected representatives are different shades of gray, there is no black/white choice?
No matter how I look at it, it just seems to me that there are no "real" choices left when it comes to politicians. Our government, as it currently stands, will never change, because it doesn't have to.
Further, the highest levels of government are completely inaccessible to the average American. Don't believe me? Try scheduling an appointment to meet the president in the oval office if you make less than $500K per year and don't contribute heavily to campaigns.
Our elected officials maintain "war chests" in the millions, and sometimes tens, or even hundreds of millions of dollars. Without being "ross perot" rich, you must have the backing of either the RNC or the DNC to run--otherwise you are relegated to the ron paul/ralph nader scrap heap. Unfortunately, the coin from the rnc/dnc purse comes with many strings. The "committee to elect" "citizens for" groups that buy air time, travel around like dead head groupies to wave posters at every rally, and even seed audiences with questions all have a tit for tat mentality.
Anyone who claims that they "Don't accept money from the PACs" is full of shit. After all, aren't the RNC and DNC really just PACs? (A group of citizens with the common goals of passing legislation that supports their idealism.) I just saw B.O. claim exactly that on a commercial (which was paid for by PA for Barack or some nonsense.) Of course he didn't take the money. The party did. then the party gave him money, of gave it to other citizens groups, to make campaign ads, throw mud, etc.
I'm not just picking on B.O., after all the Clintons get their money from US citizens whenever they purchase anything at wal-mart. (lemme esplain. You but kraft dinner at Wal-mart. Wal-mart buys it's craft dinner thru china. Rich people in china give money to Clintons for everything from an overnighter in the 1600 pa ave. Bed and breakfast to secret hard drives from los alamos.) As for GWB, we all know he gets all his money from KBR-Haliburton and the Jews. Remember a few months ago when The asshat's campaign was nearly bankrupt, and he even had to carry his own bags at the airport like us "commoners?" All of the sudden he's flush. How'd that happen? Does anyone honestly believe he did that without an understanding that he would "pay it back, when the time was right?"
I'm just no longer certain that our government is of, by, and for the people. Can anyone tell me how a person who makes less than 60K per year could ever run for president, without having to sell their soul to committees, campaigns, or pundits? The longer someone stays in the business of governing, the more accustomed they become to its trappings, and the more ready they are to do whatever it takes to stay in, or at least near, power.
Which is why we always hear about term limits, and legislation gets introduced, only to languish in committee, where it eventually dies of neglect. The only term limit imposed by our founding fathers related to the president, and was imposed by Washington himself, because he believed that it was necessary for himself to step down after two terms because the orderly transition of power was necessary if the union was to survive. The two-term tradition was kept until FDR, and congress changed it into law with the 22nd amendment in 1947, and ratified in in 1951.
So why has that been good for the executive branch for the last 57 years, but it does not seem so good for the legislative branch? Maybe it takes them longer to pay back all the favors.
Here's my point: if our government of, by, and for the people is no longer of, or by, or for the people, and our only constitutional redress of this grievance is in the ballot box, how are we ever to appoint an honest electorate again?