Well George, do you mean actors like Ronald Reagan who was the presidential spokesmodel that was responsible for the deregulation of the banking industry and elimination of the capital gains tax that was holding the country's infrastructure up. Or maybe it's Sarah Palin who poses as our friend and stands up for conservative values. It could be even lesser characters like Glenn Beck that insist that they are God inspired and they have exclusive access to the "honest" truth. The list of villains far outnumbers the list of benefactors.
I disagree that changing the money flow is the first priority and education second. You see, it takes education to discern the game in the first place. We are not educated about the workings of government and political operations in school, unless we have a political science major. If we do not have adequate knowledge of the problem, which I agree is the proper flow or lack thereof, how can we appropriately assess a viable plan of action? The problem with most Republican arguments are based on what they don't know about politics and what they have heard some ideologue say. Also we are entirely unable, on an individual basis, to enact any change in the flow of special interest money, bribes, and purchased legislation.
So I assert that what is needed is an illumination of the minds that leads us to unifying our intentions and our votes to get things moving in a more utilitarian direction. It's like saying before we go to college and get an education we need to start performing brain surgery. People need brain surgery, but they need educated people making those kinds of decisions. Once we all KNOW what the problem is we can corporately and effectually "speak" and push to legislate a regulation of government for the benefit of the common good. Obama is in the process of moving regulations in place to put limits on contributions and to make sources of all such transactions publicly accessible. It's not going to be perfect, but it is a start.
The underlying problem is that we live in a Plutocratic state. The wealthy 1% control 90% of the financial wealth in this country. http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2007/01/08/plutonomics/
My question for you is: How do you propose we change how the money flows when even with all of the 90% of us combined cannot match the wealthy's control of the money? Are you suggesting we do it through legislation? I feel that it is what needs be done, but easier said than done. And also saying that we must not feed bad actors, which is a metaphor for the players involved etc..., is an assertion that really makes no definitive statement. You have not expressed your idea, but alluded to something that you have conceptualized. Instead of assuming your meaning, I would ask you to be clear about your ideas and not mask things in metaphor and buzz words. I truly want to understand what it is you mean. Until I know precisely what you are referring to when you say "bad actors" and "who do you refuse to buy from", I would ask you specifically who you suggest the bad actors are and who do you refuse to buy from. I can sense your frustration and believe that you are struggling with these injustices. I struggle with frustration every day.
It is very important that we speak the same language and strive to understand one another. We have to work to get ourselves in sync with one another and find a way to come together. I'm not trying to criticize you or put you down in any way. I am trying my best to find a way to understand your perspective. I care. Thank you, my friend. Peace.