[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look, the no one wanted to vote against the Ports Safe Bill because any such politician would have been branded as very soft on terrorism and national security. It was passed on literally the last hour of the previous COngress, so no one had time to amend it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are agreeing with my point that "even those who might have thought the bill to be bad public policy put their fingers to the wind and decided that they could be more hurt by political opponents saying "He/she voted against making our ports secure" than "He/she voted to make it really difficult to put money into one's online poker account."" Right?

If so, do you find it admirable for a politician to decide what to do based on fear of what might inaccurately be said of him or her, versus basing such decisions on what he or she believes is actually right or wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem IMO is our society today. Too many TV babbies, with way too short of an attention span. Do you realize that for some demographics, people get more political information from Leno, Dave, and John, than all the News shows, mags, and blogs combined?

Everyone is more concerned with me right now than us some years from now that this type of politics is what this society deserves as "we" demand it.

I've worked for some very good politicans, and some crappy pols. Those with true conviction and a personal perspective are grist for the political party mill. If you are really good and can convince the people at best you get three terms in the House and Senate shot or two, IMO.

You can demand the ideal or work within the "system" as it is. But politics is exactly like the lottery in that you have to be in it to win it.


D$D