I noticed many people criticizing Sheldon Adelson for spending money on political races. There's something fundamentally wrong with the calculus used against Adelson. If it should be wrong for a wealthy person to donate to another candidate through PACs, then why should it be right for a wealthy person to donate to himself/herself in pursuit of office?
If the criticism of Adelson is the amount of money he's spending, then there should be some rule against wealthy people running for office and spending their own money. To me, I think that a wealthy person is willing to spend money for a cause is a noble thing. The real issue is the cause, not that a wealthy person is willing to support that cause. And that's one reason why I cried when I saw how Sue Lowden was viciously attacked. She was spending her own money on a race, which makes her a role model.
Mark served honorably for four years on active duty in the Marine Corps infantry, and was a Libertarian endorsed candidate for a municipal office in 2002. He re-enlisted in the ARNG in 2006 because he was depressed/at times SI without the military. He has held the NFA Series 3 license (futures and futures options broker) which he did a voluntary withdrawal on because he couldn't in good conscience sell managed futures since firms would do better to hire an in-house trader to trade a proprietary account with a discount broker, which he outlined in his well-written withdrawal request. Since the year 2000, he has spent much of his free time reading the great minds of the Austrian School of economics, such as Murray Rothbard, Henry Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, et al.