There is a U.S. blog called "DAILY KOS" that I enjoy reading because they reflect a lot of my own views on things. A couple of weeks ago the came out with THIS article, which I think puts the whole U.S. election thing into "Perspective!" (God I love that word.)
Just in case ya didn't see it the first time around, we are reproducing it here for your perusal .........!
The Two Doctors
I will get right to the point and begin assertion with an analogy. Let’s say you are exhibiting symptoms for an illness and you have a choice of two doctors. You go to the first doctor, conducts and examination and notes that you have a fever, cough, runny nose and a headache. The doctor acknowledges that you “feel” ill and prescribes treatments for your symptoms…and ice pack for your fever, cough medicine for your cough, tissues for your nose and aspirin for your headache.
You go to the second doctor. The doctor also notes your symptoms. However, the second doctor tells you straight out that you have viral pneumonia. Instead of recommending treatments for your symptoms, the doctor prescribes you anti-viral medication to treat the root-cause of your illness.
Which doctor would you more likely recommend and trust in the future to treat your illnesses?
I bring you to what I believe is the fundamental illness in our nation: corruption of our system of government due to the influence of big money. No matter what your personal issue is, be it gun violence, health care, climate change, security etc, the government’s inability to effectively deal with these issues is due to the influence of big money in our political system.
The Two Candidates
Here’s where the analogy comes in. Several times in the Democratic debates, our current Democratic candidates were asked a simple question: “Neither party has the guts to take on Wall Street. Is the System Rigged?”
When Secretary Clinton is asked this question, her original response is to not directly answer. She’ll respond and say that she went after Wall Street, not just the big banks, originally even suggesting that support for financial institutions as a “rebuke” to the terrorists who struck on 9/11. She falls short, however, of admitting that Wall Street commits fraud.
Sen Sanders, on the other hand, calls out Wall Street for what it is. He clearly says that the “business model of Wall Street is fraud”.
In my analogy, Secretary Clinton is the doctor who wants to treat the symptoms. Sen Sanders is the doctor who wants to treat the root cause of the illness. To cure an illness, you have to recognize and treat what’s causing it in the first place. Secretary Clinton is slow to call out the corruption for what it is. To publicly recognize that Wall Street commits fraud is a declaration that you are willing to hold those guilty criminally accountable for those crimes. And holding those criminally accountable is the most effective step to treat the illness.
To be fair, after Sen Sanders’ victory in NH, Secretary Clinton began to adopt Sen Sanders rhetoric, now saying that the economy is rigged in favor of those at the top. This is somewhat better than what Pres Obama will say, wording his commentary on the issue to say that “the average person feels their voice doesn't matter, that the system is rigged in favor of the rich or the powerful”. This statement is carefully worded, to match the current administration’s failure to hold anyone on Wall Street criminally accountable for our nation’s economic collapse in 2008.
A Corrupt Political System
I’ve been a Progressive all my life…but I am not sure I would call myself a Democrat. Here’s why: I feel that both political parties are corrupt, at least in the fact that they want to hold political and economic power by any means necessary. The main difference is that Democrats at least will try and pass legislation to help the people, so long as it does not go against the will of the 1% and their economic interests. If this is not true, why has not one Bankster gone to prison for fraud in the past 7 years? Why the support of TPP?
Republicans do not even acknowledge the symptoms. They protest that whatever is good for business is good for the country and wealth gives the right to wield power over others, no matter how it is earned. Republican voters 1) are either rubes that believe in trickle-down economics despite a complete lack of historical evidence as proof, 2) back candidates that profess support for their conservative social or wedge issues, 3) believe in a zero-sum system, that providing anything to support another group of people will take away something that they already have, 4) some combination thereof.
Final Thoughts to Consider
Bernie Sanders is a unique candidate. He is able to call out the corruption for what it is because 1) for most of his career he has called himself an Independent, not reliant on a corrupt political system and 2) he has based his political career in a state where he didn’t have to rely on a national party who would never back him, specifically because he wants to fix the corrupt system that supports them.
A candidate like Bernie Sanders is not likely to come again in our generation, because neither political party would ever support such a candidate.
As I write this, Secretary Clinton has a substantial lead in the Democratic Primary and is likely to win the nomination. To be sure, while far better than a vote for any Republican to subdue our nation's symptoms, unfortunately a vote for her sends a message to both parties that it's okay to continue business as usual, and not deal with a cure head-on.
As voting citizens, we have the opportunity to send a message that the government is supposed to be for, by and of the people, and those criminally liable for its illness must be held accountable accordingly. Please consider this when you cast your vote.