I don't disagree at all with your statement(s). I just think both sides are corrupted by their owners. And probably toast the owners with each other at the pub after all their hard work... maintaining the circus with which to distract us.
IMO, political leaders are more greatly owned; they are not where my blame is focused. By owners I mean what George Carlin meant when he described them.
I won't link to you tube on principle, but duckduckgo will no doubt find a Carlin "Owners of the Country".
Not true. The only people with that power are the ones you vote for, but obviously they are just and righteous, only to be corrupted by the evils of the wealthy.
I reckon I misread the article upon which I am commenting then.
I hardly think pols are lily white, but I didn't see the part where they had Weinstein removed from Evergreen, or made a law preventing him from posting online.
The pols benefit from the divide et impera thing, but not as much as those they serve.
Sorry. I didn't YOU specifically. I meant it in general. Everyone thinks their person is holier than thou, and its all the other guy's fault that the wealthy buy them. Moreover, these same people blame the corporatists for buying power rather than worrying about how much power is available for purchase.
Thanks for the clarification; I do understand that bit about we all kvetch about them as a group but think we only elect saints ourselves.
I can only state that I don't follow that maxim. But partly because I don't think we are really given a choice for whom to vote. Any good ones that would actually serve the people aren't given a chance to be within light years of governing power. They aren't even allowed on the radar to be seen as an option.
The ones that they all really work for are the problem.
I simply disagree. The left is dominated by entitled, elitist pricks and that include most of the party on the coasts in particular.
I don't disagree at all with your statement(s). I just think both sides are corrupted by their owners. And probably toast the owners with each other at the pub after all their hard work... maintaining the circus with which to distract us.
I simply believe blaming leadership is a cop out. These leaders are selected by the mob.
IMO, political leaders are more greatly owned; they are not where my blame is focused. By owners I mean what George Carlin meant when he described them.
I won't link to you tube on principle, but duckduckgo will no doubt find a Carlin "Owners of the Country".
"The big wealthy business interests" that change every couple of decades?
Yes. Those that believe their wealth entitles upon them the power to make the decisions the rest of us should follow.
Not true. The only people with that power are the ones you vote for, but obviously they are just and righteous, only to be corrupted by the evils of the wealthy.
I reckon I misread the article upon which I am commenting then.
I hardly think pols are lily white, but I didn't see the part where they had Weinstein removed from Evergreen, or made a law preventing him from posting online.
The pols benefit from the divide et impera thing, but not as much as those they serve.
We'll agree to disagree. Cheers.
Sorry. I didn't YOU specifically. I meant it in general. Everyone thinks their person is holier than thou, and its all the other guy's fault that the wealthy buy them. Moreover, these same people blame the corporatists for buying power rather than worrying about how much power is available for purchase.
Thanks for the clarification; I do understand that bit about we all kvetch about them as a group but think we only elect saints ourselves.
I can only state that I don't follow that maxim. But partly because I don't think we are really given a choice for whom to vote. Any good ones that would actually serve the people aren't given a chance to be within light years of governing power. They aren't even allowed on the radar to be seen as an option.