Well, since you ask, and meaning no offense...

I see a significant difference between the our two major political parties. Perhaps it is true that it would be easier for a poor man (person) to pass through the eye of a needle than to become a viable candidate for election, but it is also true that the wealthy don't have to work for their daily bread and have the time to spend on politics. That doesn't mean that they are all out to exploit the working man or that liberal (and I like Webster's definition of the term) politicians are tools of the capitalist machine.

You seem to believe both of these things and, while you are certainly entitled to your opinion, to me it sometimes puts you on a soapbox in the park next to the Flat-Earthers and Alien Abductees. We have made major changes in our country in the past fifty years, and these changes have usually taken place because members of a political party adopted/co-opted a popular movement. Thinking and speaking of the Democrats and Republicans as essentially identical, and therefor considering the two-party political process as irrelevant to any kind of effective change, is divorced from reality.

I'm afraid that, when I see a Bobert post to a thread that I'm following, I say "just another rave" to myself and pass it right by. I know that I'm missing things by doing so. You are not the only person that I put into that category, and (without naming names) they come from all points of that multidimensional tesseract we call a socio-economic/political spectrum.