hitting the jackpot when hitting the jackpot is meaningless

I'm not sure what the exact figure was but I heard on the radio this morning that some casino donated, like, 20 million dollars to an organization that sends campaign contributions to New Gingrich. 20 million dollars seems like a lot of money. Maybe it was 20, 000. Either way: this is upsetting.

First of all: Newt Gingrich isn't going to win. And I'm not just saying this because I don't want him to win (although, it's true--i really don't want him to win). But he's running against an incumbent and, historically, you have to be pretty effing awesome to oust an incumbent.

Secondly: it's extremely frustrating because--think of where that money could have gone. Cancer research. Social charities. Education. Basically: anything besides a Republican nominee who doesn't have a chance in hell of winning and, therefore, validating such a large monetary contribution.

Fuck: we're in the midst of a horrible horrible recession. They could have just flown over any struggling post-industrial city in a small private jet and thrown the money out and let everyone beat each other up in a mad-dash game of cash grab. This would be an excellent metaphor for the cutthroat capitalist society we live in. But a better metaphor I think is what actually happened: a casino betting on a politician who won't win when that money could have been better spent elsewhere. It's a pretty stupid gamble for a casino. They should know better. They're a casino.

Also: it's just so emblematic of the current political climate. The rich buying the rich a better shot of representing themselves (the rich) in public office. This is why we need to get money out of politics. It's not fair that your only chance of winning is determined by how much you're able to raise for TV spots and a team and various campaign materials. Why should that be a factor? Why are we consistently voting for the rich guys? Because they're the ones who are most immediately visible. Because they are the ones with all the money. But imagine if it all it took were a basic set of qualifications (which it's kind of supposed to anyway). Things like: American citizenship, IQ, Political Savvy, etc. You know, things that should matter. Each presidential hopeful would compete at a regional level until the people voted for their favorite. Then: that person would advance to the next round where, again, the people would vote for their favorite. And so on and so forth until we had a president who truly represented the people vs. a president who we picked because our options are extremely fucking limited and these were the only nominees who had enough money to make themselves seen.

I want to feel represented by the people who make decisions that affect me. And, so far, I've never felt that. And I think there are a lot of people who feel the same way. The rich have their two parties and everyone else plays along because we have to. It's the illusion that we're actually participating in the electoral process--that our vote truly matters. And it doesn't. It really fucking doesn't. The only vote that matters is money. And even then--suppose I raised enough money independently and I wanted to donate it to my favorite fringe politician--an independent; someone outside the two-party system. I could give them 20 million dollars but they still would not have a chance. The two-party system is so fucking over-simplified that no one wants to consider other options. In Lincoln's day, new party's were emerging all the time. Well, not all the time. But there were more than just two options and people took these other options seriously. Ironically: it was Lincoln who finally established a national currency and, ever since, it's been a two-party system.