>>Question (challenge?) answered by BB
Posted January 24, 2010on:
Questions for America:
Where do you stand Dr. Guarino, Mr. Brown, Wilkins, Smith, Ware, Baron, Cone, Spag, Brod, Hoggard, Hieb, Bubba, Burgess, Holder, Shell, Mrs. Polinski, Bowers etc…, or have you chosen to ignore the unpalatable?
…there are now no checks on the ability of corporations or unions or other giant aggregations of power… to decide our elections.
They can spend all the money they want.
And if they can spend all the money they want — sooner, rather than later — they will implant the legislators of their choice in every office…
And if Senators and Congressmen and Governors and Mayors and Councilmen and everyone in between are entirely beholden to the corporations for election and re-election to office, soon they will erase whatever checks there might still exist to just slow down the ability of corporations to decide… the laws.
It is almost literally true that any political science fiction nightmare you can now dream up — no matter whether you are conservative or liberal — it is now legal.
Because the people who can make it legal, can now be entirely bought and sold — no actual citizens required in the process.
And the entirely bought and sold politicians, can change any laws.
And any legal defense you can structure now, can be undone by the politicians who will be bought and sold into office this November, or two years from now.
And any legal defense which honest politicians can somehow wedge up against them this November, or two years from now, can be undone by the next even larger set of politicians who will be bought and sold into office in 2014, or 2016, or 2018.
…Right now, you can prostitute all of the politicians some of the time, and prostitute some of the politicians all the time, but you cannot prostitute all the politicians all the time.
…this will change.
BB: Fact: Politicians have always been bought. Limiting the amount that could be contributed by any one person did nothing but cover up just where the actual funds were coming from. It forced voters to trace the background of each contributor (usually back to their employer). Allowing the employer to donate eliminates this need to search, and knowing the employers goals gives a very good indication of the candidates goals if he/she accepts the funds.
Fact: Votes have likewise always been bought. Story: George Washington lost his first run for office because he refused to offer a keg of spirits for the voters at the polls. He learned his lesson and never lost another election. In our times we have the untouchables of the entitlement programs that act as the proverbial keg of spirits. Any candidate who tells the truth about the need to overhaul Medicare and Social Security is dead from the start. This also applies to the corporate welfare programs which have also become entitlements. Welfare that is actually called welfare as in handouts to the poor put altogether are not even a fraction of one percent of these actual, but unnamed, welfare programs, but mention welfare and all voters are all for cutting them. So we cut welfare spending and the voters are happy and continue to give their votes to the liars who defend the real destroyers of our economy and way of life.
Transparency is the key! Allow any and all contributions from any and all, but force transparency so the voters know who is buying the politician. This will tell voters far more than any rhetoric from the politician running for office. Words lie, deeds tell the truth. The action of taking funds from organizations with apparent goals then tells the public the goals of the politician.
I believe this past election of Obama to office has been a lesson to voters. They bought into the photogenic TV image and well read words from the teleprompter and refused to look at the past and present deeds and associations of the candidate. Those of us who tried to point out these past associations as being significant in telling us the beliefs and goals of the candidate Obama were called unsavory names and told these things did not matter that we were only to listen to his words. The Association with ACORN was ignored; the association with communist and haters of America were ignored; the acceptance of funds from anti-American groups and individuals was ignored and said to be unimportant. The Tea Party members will not make this mistake again. In New York District 23 a man was almost elected who was so inarticulate he couldn’t make himself understood beyond saying he was against big government and big spending and had a history of being a conservative voter himself. People turned against a self proclaimed conservative whose voting record did not indicate conservatism.
This ruling by the Supreme Court will merely open the field of contributions to transparency and not to ALL as you seem to think because All have already been in the picture only without the transparency.
You asked for my thoughts. You now have them. It wasn’t a topic I chose to blog on as I saw it as a topic many would blog on and my bitty two cents worth wasn’t needed. And face it, regardless of what is said or not said it is now the law of the land. BB