Although George Soros, simply because of his vast wealth, is able to wield power, I do not believe that he is more powerful than the Clintons.
Dear Michael.SF:
I have long believed that the Clintons would be powerless without the support of wealthy sponsors behind the scenes. Whether or not Soros rises to the level of an actual sponsor could be argued. But your point is well taken.
I have edited the passage in question to remove any unnecessary and irresolvable ambiguity regarding Soros' role. And Jim Robinson has kindly obliged to update my post accordingly.
Thank you for bringing the problem to my attention. Your critique has helped me improve the article.
However, Soros' massive soft-money contributions have indisputably given him power over Democrat strategy.
Soros' leadership has manifested itself in ways both subtle and striking, both direct and indirect, as Democrat tactics devolve ever deeper into a fever swamp of slander, sedition, violence and crude propaganda
Dear Mr. Poe,
I am complimented that you took my comments seriously enough to make some changes in your article.
The two excerpts above, I feel are a very valid assessment of the Soro's situation.
I do agree fully with you that the Clinton's are a bit like Scarlet, living off of the fruits of others, but we may disagree a bit on who is controlling who.
The Clinton's are, in my opinion, the most frightening political team in US history. They have constantly shielded their true inner selves and thoughts from others to develop a persona(s) for the expressed purpose of garnering political power. One has to question anybody that would go to such lengths of deception, subterfuge and even self dimenishment (Hillary not leaving him) in order to be President(s).
Thank you again, I am indeed complimented. Good luck to you and your article.
Michael