Politicians Are Not Always Bad Politicians
Henry Clay said
he'd rather be right than be President. A
nice thing to say, PROVIDED you only mean it theoretically.
Because, anyone who insists on absolute integrity and honesty will
be President or serve in any other governing capacity -- and thus will
be in no position to oppose those far more DANGEROUS politicians
who would turn their country into a dictatorship.
Even Lincoln, and most any other successful President you care to
various incompetent persons
in positions of power as payoffs for political support during the
campaign. Nominal corruption is one way an otherwise honest
can even the odds against those who are fiercely corrupt:
fight fire with fire, to put out a fire:
the use of firebreaks to stop a forest
If the system
is corrupt (campaign contributions in exchange for legislative favors),
then being "pure" is admirable -- and politically suicidal.
THE TRUE TEST
Those who wish to destroy democracy and
would be absolutely delighted if their opponents would swear off
accepting any and all
tainted political contributions -- because it would insure a landslide
for the worst elements in society.
How TOO MUCH corruption
can destroy a nation, or a world
HERE'S ARE EXAMPLES OF HOW
CAN KILL MILLIONS: EACH ONE CAUSED BY THE SAME PAY-TO-PLAY
THE FINANCIAL CRISIS, 2008-9 (PAST)
THE OPIOID CRISIS
EMP / ELECTRICAL GRID UNPREPAREDNESS (EVOLVING)
that a country's political ethos allows anyone, from any country, to
contribute vast sums of money to a political candidate or party.
In effect, this is true now, because the so-called limits to
contributions have loopholes. As a result, politicians spend
of their time raising funds for their next campaign, instead of looking
into ways to make a better, safer country. Most do this with distaste,
while others are quite enthusiastic about building up a big
the donors, their contributions can, in effect, change policies and
laws, resulting in profit increases and tax deductions worth hundreds
of times the value of their donations. In a sense, they would
their fiduciary duty (i.e., to act solely in the best interests of
their clients or investors) not to take advantage of these
opportunities (besides, everyone else is doing it).
result, politicians are quite reasonably paranoid when it comes to
displeasing special interest groups. Such as owners and
of the nation's electric grid. And so, rather than demanding
that those utilities spend millions or even billions to secure that
grid -- or perhaps even better, voting for tax increases so the
government can fix this grave national security threat -- most of them
smart thing and keep quiet. After all, being thrown out in
next election won't give them the opportunity to fix things, either.
AND NOW, THE REALLY
So, nothing gets secured, or at least, not very fast. There
has already been one recent (April 2013) brazen attempt
to plunge the nation (or a part of the nation) into devastating darkness
(no, you probably didn't hear about it). And this:
assault on US power station could have been the rehearsal
for an 'even
bigger terrorist attack', warns industry expert."
international terrorists (and unfriendly states) have
known for decades how easy it would be to take this nation down, as
did the non-partisan "EMP
If the terrorists
succeed, all the extra profits garnered by delaying security measures
will disappear ten thousand fold, along with a way of life, for rich
and poor alike. $5-10 billion to fix it NOW, or $50 trillion
clean up the mess AFTER: "Pay me now, or pay me later".
attempts to limit the salaries of legislators at all levels of
government (so they won't forget what it's like to be poor, or to
reduce the deficit) is utterly
MAD: the quickest and cheapest way to increase the
professionalism and integrity of our representatives is to OVER-pay
them so they don't have to go begging to special interests --
instead will feel free to do the right thing, and fix these threats.