Rich But not Run-for-Office Rich

A cartoon on New Yorker's November 1, 2010 issue caught my attention.  In a luxurious party scene, two women commented about an apparently rich man: "He's rich, but not run-for-office rich."

I almost fell off my chair laughing then my mood got darker.  Indeed, haven't we seen things like this?  This year, the obscenity of someone's wealth reached to the dizzying height, embodied by Californian gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman who has so far spent more than $140 million of her own money in her campaign.

What's wrong with this picture?  In regardless of her candidacy and her policies, one has to wonder that in a society when a person could afford to spend such vast amount of money on an elected office, something was seriously wrong.

How could we allow a person accumulated billions of dollars while some people in this country don't have enough food, decent education and health care?

This country has been robbing from the poor and giving to the rich for way too long.  It's high time to change it.  But real change, alas, is nowhere to be found.


Schism © Matthew Felix Sun