should we find the most liberal, stinking-rich candidates we can find?

[Syrinx]

Generally speaking, I think the Congress should be representative of the people. There should be some working-class people in the Senate, for example. But, even now, that ain't happening. And it doesn't seem to be on the verge of happening either.

Should Democrats try to recruit super-wealthy principled liberals to run for national office? They wouldn't be in it for the payday. They still wouldn't want to lose, but they wouldn't be motivated at all by the potential loss of $174,000 in annual salary.

I'm thinking of maybe Larry David challenging Diane Feinstein for her senate seat. Or Warren Buffett taking on Ben Nelson in Nebraska.

I'm just spit-balling in the wee hours, and I admit I haven't thought this through.

[WinkyDink]

1. Kennedy? Kerry?

[zipplewrath]

2. Something I realized long ago

I've heard Clinton speak of it, and several of the current Kennedy generation has mentioned a similar phenomenon. People of such phenomenal wealth can accomplish much more outside of the political sphere. The international works of Buffet and Gates, the Clinton foundation, and several NGO's set up by Kennedy offspring are very active and far more rewarding to them than anything they feel they could accomplish in the political sphere.

The GOP on the other hand is becoming the playground of the narcissistic right wing.

[Brickbat]

3. Warren Buffett is a liberal?