Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Dylan Matigan Thinks There is a National Movement Underway

Today, while on the treadmill, I tuned into MSNBC and watched the Dylan Matigan Show. He's another one of the head cases who appear on MSNBC. The last time I saw him he was screaming his head off at some Tea Party guy. Hardly gave him a chance to say, "Thanks for having me" before he went on a rant and cut the guy off the air.

(Anger management issues)

Today, Matigan was lamenting the influence of money in politics. That's fair, but his answer is the loons protesting on Wall Street. These are his heroes, you see. Not only Wall Street, but Dylan reports that students in universities all over the nation are walking out to protest the money in our elections. It is a national movement. (As previously reported my school UC-Irvine has not gone anywhere.)

Sorry Dylan, but there is no nation-wide movement to protest the money in our elections. There is no Z Party as you are trying to coin it. What the dopes protesting on Wall Street are against is capitalism and anything having to do with money. Other than that, they don't really know what they are protesting about, as was so amply demonstrated when Fox News went out on the street to ask them why there were protesting.

Of course, I agree that there is a problem with money buying political influence and we should have laws to try and prevent that. I found it interesting that the name "Solyndra" failed to come up in the discussion. In fact, I wonder just how much the mad-hatters at MSNBC are even talking about Solyndra. That is a classic case of money buying favor.

But if you want to get the money completely out of politics, then explain to me how any politician-other than a billionaire- is going to convince a majority of people in the US to vote for him or her. Of course, good old Joe Stalin never needed money to run any campaigns, did he?

Be careful what you wish for.

3 comments:

  1. Of course Stalin needed money. He robbed banks all over the Caucusus. Revolutions aren't cheap you know.

    ReplyDelete
  2. No, but elections can be cheap-when you don't have them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Getting 99% of the vote takes some cash too. Why do you think dictators tend to end up bankrupting their countries?

    ReplyDelete