Fred and Sam (NOTE: The names have been changed to protect the guilty) found it boring to sit around keeping track of their millions and billions of dollars — so they decided to buy the White House. They didn’t want to go to all the trouble of starting new political parties, so they went out and bought a couple. They kept all the same names, slogans, logos and literature so that very few voters were any the wiser.
One of their difficulties was getting suitable presidential candidates. They searched “by sea and by land” for men with neither courage nor compassion — but with the looks and speaking ability to charm dozens of millions of voters. (“Now, sincerity is the key to this whole thing. Once you can fake that ...”) Their plan required TWO bad candidates for each office, and it didn’t make any difference to them which one of them got elected.
Men who would run against their hand-picked toadies mysteriously died in plane crashes, car wrecks, mental hospitals and falls from high windows. (You know. Soap opera stuff.)
As an election approached, Fred’s and Sam’s candidates would each condemn the other. Each would point out the character flaws and bad track-record of the other. Come Election Day, we all knew that two totally dishonorable, despicable, evil characters were running against each other for each office — one from each of Fred’s and Sam’s parties.
Now, here’s the kicker: We were all put on notice that a vote for any other presidential candidate would be wasted. We were told over and over to “choose the lesser of two evils.” Any other candidate was to be regarded as a “spoiler” who would only take votes away from whichever candidate might turn out to be the “lesser of two evils.”
Elections came and went, and as the generations passed into history, hardly anybody ever was elevated to the presidency but Fred’s and Sam’s hand-picked skunks.
And the people made speeches on patriotic occasions about our wonderful free political system that reflects the will of the people. We all knew about Russian Communist elections with a single candidate for each office getting 102.3 percent of the vote. (Later on, Russian elections featured two candidates for each office — both from the Communist Party.) We congratulated ourselves on always having candidates from TWO parties.
“Alice” told us about the Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum way of it, but we ignored her.
Glenn Jacobs
Eagar
chatmandu002 posted at 8:07 pm on Tue, Sep 11, 2012.
Glenn,
Was your letter inspirational? No
Was your letter insightful? No
Was your letter helpful? No
Was your letter truthful? No
Was your letter cynical? Yes
I guess you accomplished your intent.
Dale Whiting posted at 9:14 pm on Tue, Sep 11, 2012.
chatmandu002,
The editors liked it!
Arizona Willie posted at 10:29 pm on Tue, Sep 11, 2012.
While the writer is too cynical -- the letter does contain much truth.
We do have the best government money can buy.
We have legislators who let lobbiests and their staff actually write legislation that the Legislator the introduces into Congress.
Because of the expense of running for office, raising money is a Congressman's number one job starting the day after he is sworn in.
Most Congressmen have full time staff members whose only job is raising money.
Lobbiests have way too much influence with Congressmen because they provide tons of free goodies plus campaign contributions. Campaign contributions is political speak for BRIBE.
Until and unless we outlaw lobbying, the situation will not change.
Campaigns should all be publically funded with each candidate for Senate and House given a certain amount of money to campaign with and with strict accountability to prevent any excess money being spent by them or on their behalf.
All pacs must be outlawed also.
Unfortunately, however, NONE of these things will ever happen in this Universe.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 11:00 pm on Tue, Sep 11, 2012.
and the point of this Letter to the Editor is...........WHAT ???
Oh, that's right there is no point to this Letter....same for Little "willie's" comment.......[wink]
Cerulean posted at 9:54 am on Wed, Sep 12, 2012.
If you listen to Jimmy Carter he would say that the reason “we have one of the worst election processes in the world” is because of “an income tax code that exacerbates the gap between the wealthiest Americans and the rest of the electorate, allowing the rich even greater influence over public discourse and electioneering.” He said this is true because of the “Supreme Court decision that allows unlimited contributions to third-party groups that don’t have to disclose their donors.”
In other words, it may not be good ol Fred and Sam who are buying the election process. It could be a Saudi prince, a Mexican drug cartel or the entire hedge fund industry.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/carter-financial-corruption-harms-us-elections-17214928#.UFAViFGih_A
walkergeist posted at 11:54 am on Wed, Sep 12, 2012.
Brilliant, Mr. Jacobs. Your point(s) is/are well-taken. You've managed to put in clear and simple terms exactly what is happening in American politics, and you went for the root--which is smart. What at least one of the commenters doesn't grasp is that voting for ANY Republican or Democrat is to vote for the other. They have no idea how to function outside the box they have in their heads where they've been trained to try to replace the guy who is doing exactly what the guy before him did, with a guy who will do exactly what the guy before him did. What did Einstein say about expecting a different result? Someone who doesn't listen is no better off than someone who can't hear. As always, I remain at your service-- Walker Geist
Accuracy posted at 1:35 pm on Wed, Sep 12, 2012.
Glenn Jacobs noted: “Now, here’s the kicker: We were all put on notice that a vote for any other presidential candidate would be wasted. We were told over and over to “choose the lesser of two evils.” Any other candidate was to be regarded as a “spoiler” who would only take votes away from whichever candidate might turn out to be the “lesser of two evils.””
----------------------------------------------------
It's a long way till Election Day. Many conservatives and liberals voters see the Obama-Romney race as a choice between the lesser of two evils.
The American Jewish Community usually votes more Democratic. But at the Democratic National Convention, Democrat delegates removed a reference to “God” and any mention of Jerusalem from their party platform . . . and nation-wide public outrage followed.
Some political observers believe voters in support of Israel, especially in light of the rising threat on the horizon of a nuclear-armed Iran, could potentially influence the race for the White House if it's a close one.
President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have clashed over how to handle Iran — and Obama has now declined to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he visits the United States later this month to attend the UN General Assembly meeting in New York.
While the Iran threat could make a huge difference in who the next president of the United States will be.
Cerulean posted at 5:19 pm on Wed, Sep 12, 2012.
Accuracy.
Many, hundreds of thousands of Jewish people do not appreciate American Christians pushing a Zionist state on Jerusalem.
http://youtu.be/wNLJY-x1ssc
And for the sake of Jerusalem I shall not remain silent. Isaiah 61.
Reasons to oppose a Zionist Jerusalem, “the city which is sacred to all the nations should remain unique and be above all national interests of all people by immediately proclaiming Jerusalem an international city and its citizens under the protection of the United Nations” Quote by Rabbi Uri Blau in an address to the United Nations.
Accuracy posted at 9:04 am on Thu, Sep 13, 2012.
Cerulean posted: “Many, hundreds of thousands of Jewish people do not appreciate American Christians pushing a Zionist state on Jerusalem.”
-------------------------------------------------------------
But, not the hundreds of thousands of eligible Jewish/American voters living in Israel, who are for Jerusalem. U.S. citizens living in Israel are showing major interest in this year's election with more registering to vote this November than ever before.
In its 3,000 year history; Jerusalem has been destroyed twice, besieged 23 times, and attacked 52 times. Just since the nation's rebirth in 1948, Jerusalem has felt the impact of four major wars, and today is the most experienced at combating terrorism.
On the anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks, the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya and the attack on the U.S. embassy in Cairo, Egypt this week, were stark reminders of the very real nature of the conflict being waged between radical Islam and America and Israel.
sockratties posted at 7:55 am on Sat, Sep 15, 2012.
Glenn... I appreciated your "Aesopian" fable although it didn't work for many of the slack jawed yokels who read it. Maybe you need to go to the "Goldilocks" level so the irony shines through the cynicism for them.
You didn’t include the early elimination of candidates by the media in your satire as demonstrated at the early GOP debates then echoed by the electoral and caucus process. (If the incumbent had been Republican we would have seen it in the Dems primaries and caucuses.) The media did the “Soap Opera Stuff” this time.
I, for one, liked John Huntsman but he never had a chance. The media chose their favorites, gave them the limelight and others were pushed to the side. The election process, like the news, has become an info-tainment industry.
Arizona Willie posted at 10:40 am on Sat, Sep 15, 2012.
sockratties -- one of the big problems we have in America now is that ALL the media is controlled by only 6 mega corporations.
You say the media picked their candidate and pushed the others aside and you are somewhat correct.
But instead of media you should have said ' the CEO's of the media conglomerates made their choice and pushed the others aside '.
The blame lies squarely on a few very powerful and very rich individuals who control ALL the media.
sockratties posted at 10:31 pm on Sat, Sep 15, 2012.
Well, there's still PBS, LINK and Current. All listener supported. Because they cater to the thinking part of the spectrum they tend to be center to a little left of center but they provide a world view of events. Even when one doesn't agree with the perspective of a given show or segment it gives one an indication of what is going on around the globe without the bias of American media trying to shape it for you.