Musings & Sardonic Commentary on Politics, Religion, Culture & Native American Issues. Bringing you the finest in radioactive screeds since 2002! "The Local Crank" newspaper column is distributed by Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc.
Just a simple Cherokee trial lawyer, Barkman has been forcing his opinions on others in print since, for reasons that passeth understanding, he was an unsuccessful candidate for state representative in 2002. His philosophy: "If people had wanted me to be nice, they should've voted for me."
There's been an explosion of veterans running for Congress this year as Democrats, including locally David Harris, running against the shamelessly corrupt Joe Barton in CD6. I have to say, though, Major Tammy Duckworth is the most inspirational candidate I've seen in a long time. Even if you don't live in Illinois, much less her district, she's someone worth your donation.
Labels: Elections, Joe Barton
posted by The Local Crank | 10:16 PM
3 Comments:
I have two unrelated thoughts on this subject:
1 - We face a dangerous paradox in our country right now. On the one hand we have the most powerful military in the world, and the other hand we have a shocking scarcity of veterans in office. It's almost like we've handed a loaded firearm to a drunk teenager and trusted him to use it responsibly. So kudos to veterans like Duckworth for running for office. I hope many others follow in her footsteps.
2 - As much as I admire her, I will not contribute to her campaign for a simple reason: I don't believe candidates should be able to receive contributions from outside their district. If we were serious about campaign finance reform, that would be one of the most sensible first steps. Candidates should represent the people of their districts, and no one else.
Not sure I can agree with your second point, fot two reasons: one, Congressmen are supposed to represent the whole country, not just their districts. And, obviously, people outside their district will be affected by their votes. A little less parochialism would be a good thing, anyway. Second, limiting candidates to funds raised in their districts would just give a further advantage to candidates who are either rich themselves or who are willing to kowtow to the rich. I do agree there is a desperate need for comprehensive campaign finance reform, but it will have to start with reversing the Buckley v. valeo decision where SCOTUS said $ = free speech (and, therefore, those who have MORE $ have MORE rigths than the rest of us).
No argument about Buckley vs. Valeo, surely one of the worst SCOTUS decisions ever. If it was reversed and sensible limits were placed on contributions (for example, allowing only individuals to contribute and not organizations, and capping the contribution amount) then my beef with contributions from outside their districts would be much dimished. As it is right now, I think there are WAY to many Congressmen elected by the money of organizations purely outside of their districts, and I think that has a very distorting effect on democracy.
Post a Comment
<< Home