[Woodz428]

As I read all the posts it struck me funny that So. Cal. was claimed to run the state. I Illinois it is the opposite, Chicago is the bully and sucks the funds from downstate. Just a point on the "elected" comment, as a twice candidate for state rep., the term "elected" is a little overplayed. When The USSR had the candidates for their"elections" they were portrayed as stacking the deck . Well folks it's not too different here, the 2 major parties make the criteria to get on the ballot and while it is different in every state, it is biased toward them. In Illinois, a 3rd party candidare is required to get 5 times the signatures to get ballot access, and if they should accomplish that the 2 major parties can challenge any and all the signatures. The challenge then requires that every challenged signature has to be sent a statement that they are required to sign, have notarized and return to the candidate that has been challenged. As you can probably tell this creates the kind of expense that only the 2 major parties can afford. I also find it interesring that so many politicians hate people that have money that was earned, yet feel it's o.k. for them to reap benefits financially,and in perks, off the backs of citizens.