A revised version of my favorite comment on this Robert Reich's post:
"Bernie Sanders represents the interests of those who support him economically and politically.
Hillary Clinton represents the interests of those who support her economically and politically -- the same interests represented by the Republican Party -- the corporations and billionaires that fund campaigns.
It's pretty easy to see where their loyalties lie and who they will serve when they are in office."
Whose campaign are you supporting, and I mean donating to monetarily? Are you serving your own interests or those of the corporations and billionaires?
I thought this exchange from Tuesday's debate was particularly interesting:
BERNIE SANDERS: Do I consider myself part of the casino capitalist process by which so few have so much and so many have so little, by which Wall Street's greed and recklessness wrecked this economy? No, I don't.
HILLARY CLINTON: Let me follow up on that, Anderson. When I think about capitalism, I think about all the small businesses that were started because we have the opportunity and the freedom in our country for people to do that and make a good living for themselves and their families. I don't think we should confuse what we have to do every so often in America, which is save capitalism from itself.
BERNIE: Everybody is in agreement. We are a great entrepreneurial nation. We have to encourage that. Of course, we have to support small and medium-size businesses. But you can have all of the growth that you want, and it doesn't mean anything if all of the new income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent.
Bernie is right. Growth and entrepreneurship mean nothing if the vast majority are receiving none of it. But Hillary is correct that periodic reforms have saved capitalism from its excesses -- and widened prosperity.
Who do you think has the better of the argument? (Hint: You might find useful my new book "Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few.")