Special interests get a death grip on American government

One of the recurring themes of the Tea Party movement is the recognition that special interests exert far more influence over government than do individual voters and citizens. Yet that same movement seems oblivious to the fact that unlimited, undisclosed political expenditures by corporations will compound the power of special interests at the expense of the average citizen. The next time a major industry wants a bailout a la the hated TARP, for example, its ability to win friends and allies in Congress will be limited only by its willingness to spend money in the right places.

From AP:

A Montana judge says the state’s century-old ban on corporate political spending is unconstitutional.

District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock of Helena on Monday tossed out the 1912 Corrupt Practices Act that prohibits corporations from making independent political expenditures.

Sherlock ruled in favor of conservative think-tank Western Tradition Partnership.

That group challenged the law this year after the U.S. Supreme Court threw out parts of a federal law that prohibited corporations and unions from paying for advertisements for or against political candidates.

Attorney General Steve Bullock had argued that the state’s ban is unique and should stand despite the Supreme Court decision. He says Montana’s law was in response to corporate mining barons taking over state politics.

The judge’s ruling is, sadly, correct in wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” ruling. Justice Anthony Kennedy, in his majority opinion, concluded that “independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,” and thus cannot be banned.

Montana’s experience offers significant proof that Kennedy is a naive fool with no practical concept of how money influences government. As the WSJ notes:

“Montana has restricted corporate electioneering since 1904, when the state Supreme Court, siding with shareholders, ruled that mining executives misappropriated corporate funds by spending them ‘for strictly political purposes.’ Back then, Montana was a battleground between its small resident population and out-of-state corporate barons who controlled its natural resources. With mining and railroad interests spending millions to elect pliant state legislators, Montana voters fought back with their first-ever ballot initiative, passing the Corrupt Practices Act by a 3-1 margin.”

One of the three plaintiffs seeking to overturn the Montana law was the Montana Shooting Sports Association, a gun rights organization. But as association President Gary Marbut told the WSJ, even he’s worried about the consequences of winning the lawsuit.

“There’s a difference between groups like us and the Exxons of the world,” Marbut says. “We don’t want to recreate the Copper Kings era, when they owned Montana and we were their servants.”

Yeah, well. Too late for that now, huh?

208 comments Add your comment

F. Sinkwich

October 18th, 2010
6:34 pm

Jay, the scope of the Tea Party’s concerns are narrow — smaller government, more freedom.

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
6:35 pm

All of us are equal but some of us are more equal than others. That’s really nothing new and I doubt we’ll ever change it.

louis

October 18th, 2010
6:41 pm

Any sentient being knows that those large corporations are already spending all the billions they want to influence elections. Not the little guy can band together and defend himself, That’s the crusx of this case!

F. Sinkwich

October 18th, 2010
6:42 pm

I understand the left’s frustration that the Tea Party has no leader to demonize, trivialize, and destroy, although they do their best to anoint Sarah Palin, Michelle Backman, Newt, and Christine O’Donnell to that post.

Somehow lefties think the Tea Party must take a position on every issue.

Ain’t gonna happen.

@@

October 18th, 2010
6:43 pm

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
6:46 pm

“Montana’s experience offers significant proof that Kennedy is a naive fool with no practical concept of how money influences government.”

Ouch! Obviously the usually calm and detached Bruin has been poked with a stick on this one! :-)

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
6:48 pm

The next time a major industry wants a bailout a la the hated TARP, for example, its ability to win friends and allies in Congress will be limited only by its willingness to spend money in the right places.

Hasn’t that always been the case? Money talks and we know what walks……..

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
6:50 pm

I was in the other thread but I tracked y’all over here using a GPS tracking device. ;-)

@@

October 18th, 2010
6:51 pm

Giannoulias in Chicago is critiquing Obama’s first two years.

CHICAGO —
Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias says President Barack Obama made a mistake by focusing heavily on health care reform.

During an Associated Press interview Monday, Giannoulias said there should have been a “laser like” focus in Washington on creating jobs.

Wasn’t Obama just in Chicago campaigning for the guy?

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
6:52 pm

Hillbilly
And somebody we know knew you were going to say that!

saywhat?

October 18th, 2010
6:57 pm

Another step toward the United Corporations of America. sigh.

Southern Comfort

October 18th, 2010
7:02 pm

HD

And I followed your signal. ;)

“There’s a difference between groups like us and the Exxons of the world,” Marbut says. “We don’t want to recreate the Copper Kings era, when they owned Montana and we were their servants.”

If you don’t want to recreate that era, why in the hell did you open the door?

RW-(the original)

October 18th, 2010
7:04 pm

Justice Arthur Kennedy, in his majority opinion,

I never knew Arthur was a common name for Anthony.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
7:08 pm

Ole Sherlock is an interesting fellow if you look back at some of his decisions…

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
7:10 pm

RW
@ 7:04

Picky, picky, picky! :-)

jt

October 18th, 2010
7:12 pm

Good for Montana.

Another good example of nullification.

Its easy for those black-robed Washingtonians to rule.

Not so to enforce.

RW-(the original)

October 18th, 2010
7:13 pm

josef,

Maybe Jay B was watching Lawrence of Arabia when he typed this one up.

Scout

October 18th, 2010
7:14 pm

“Kennedy is a naive fool”

Hummmm, “I call that bold talk for a one eyed fat man.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKThgLq21Rc

Southern Comfort

October 18th, 2010
7:15 pm

Its easy for those black-robed Washingtonians to rule.

I’m guessing you either skipped or just plain chose to ignore the part about Montana having passed such a law in 1912 by a margin of 3-1. And that was after the STATE Supreme Court had previously ruled against corporations funding political agendas.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
7:17 pm

RW

Good one!

Jimmy Joe Bob

October 18th, 2010
7:17 pm

Well, I just cain’t believe somebody like Jay Bookman with a “cake” job down to the Atlanta Journal and Constitusion is working this late. It just ain’t natural.

Paul

October 18th, 2010
7:18 pm

“Justice Arthur Kennedy, in his majority opinion, concluded that “independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,” and thus cannot be banned. ”

I wonder how much corruption – actual, not solely in appearance – will have to be demonstrated before the Supremes revisit?

The life of a dreamer…..

RW-(the original)

October 18th, 2010
7:21 pm

Paul,

Or how many ads get run and show they’re just expressing their opinions without corruption before the hysteria stops.

Dreaming works both ways you know

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
7:23 pm

Scout

You reckon anybody could really hit anything with that Winchester ‘73, one handed, on horseback at a full run? :-)

chuck

October 18th, 2010
7:23 pm

Hmmmmmm. Ya’ll want to TAX CORPORATIONS as if they are people, but you want to LIMIT THEIR FREE SPEECH as if they are not.

Southern Comfort

October 18th, 2010
7:23 pm

Well, I’ll let y’all deal with corruption. I’m cashing in early tonight. All blogging and no sleep makes for a cranky officer in the morning.

See y’all later…

Scout

October 18th, 2010
7:24 pm

Obama is the one who has a socialist/marxist “death grip” on the American Government.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
7:24 pm

“Special interests get a death grip on American government”

BTW, where’s the news in that? It’s the way the game is played…

Scout

October 18th, 2010
7:26 pm

Hillbilly Deluxe

It would be hard until you got real close ………. but now a 12 guage double-barreled “scatter gun” would be a different story.

F. Sinkwich

October 18th, 2010
7:29 pm

Liberals think political expenditures by Unions, ACORN, Organizing for America, and other commie organizations are free speech. Expenditures by free market organizations like the Chamber of Commerce and business in general is by leftie standards unacceptable.

Go figure.

Mr_B

October 18th, 2010
7:37 pm

Wow!!! Nearly a whole hour before Scout pulled “Marxist/socialist” out!! You’re getting S…L…O…W…

larry

October 18th, 2010
7:39 pm

Funny, didnt the tea partry start out as a PAC? Dont they have corporate donors ?
So they are funded by the same special interests they claim to be against .

Sounds hypocritical to me .

Mr_B

October 18th, 2010
7:41 pm

Sink, I don’t particular care for unlimited spending by anybody, but if we’ve got to have it, lets put all the cards on the table. Just say upfront who is paying, so the voters can figure out what they’re trying to buy.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
7:43 pm

I know this is not the left wing line and I’ll probably get called a sell-out, but why shouldn’t corporations be allowed to lobby for their interests and funnel the money to those who support their cause? I don’t much care for a lot of what they do, but, still and all why is it that their special interest is bad and, say, mine isn’t? There seems to be a double standard at work here…IMHO

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
7:45 pm

Bye bye middle class. Don’t hurt yourself when you fall. The safety net will be the next thing to disappear.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
7:45 pm

Scout

He may be a Marxist/Lennist (though I doubt it) but he doesn’t have a grip on anything I’ve seen of late!

Mr_B

October 18th, 2010
7:46 pm

josef: you have just identified yourself as a lily-livered, hopey-changey, pinko liberal. The very idea!!! Conceeding that the other guys might have some rights too. Where will it stop??

BlahBlahBlah

October 18th, 2010
7:47 pm

Fact – Americans will spend more on frozen yogurt this year than all of the political contributions combined. Look at what happened when Target contributed a modest $100,000. The backlash was nuts. Sorry if I’m not buying the “sky is falling” argument.

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
7:47 pm

Scout

October 18th, 2010
7:24 pm
Obama is the one who has a socialist/marxist “death grip” on the American Government.

Scout your use of the “socialist/marxist” mantra show that you don’t just cheat in a gunfight. You cheat in a lot of things and the marines didn’t teach you that.

Mr_B

October 18th, 2010
7:48 pm

josef/scout; Sorry the current POTUS wouldn’t have made it in any of the Socialists organizations with which I was affiliated.

Mick

October 18th, 2010
7:50 pm

scout

That scene has not aged too well, kinda comes off as cartoonish. Why the hell are you so worried about obama? Powerful corporations and the very wealthy have a death grip on this country, look how they have laid waste to this economy before this president was even sworn in. His term will end, with all this undocumented money out there, corporations terms are just beginning and you can be sure they’ll be dictating. So try to realize this; obama is a marxist/socialist is smoke and mirrors and yet you and so many buy the illusion….oh disillusion nation….

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
7:52 pm

Josef,
it’s not just the presence of corporate money it’s the fact that they can remain anonymous. If they can express their “free speech” with campaign donations, we should be able to express our “free speech” in out buying decisions. Corporations have always given some money, now it is unlimited AND anonymous. The power to corrupt has just grown exponentially.

Gator Joe

October 18th, 2010
7:53 pm

Jay,
Why would these corporations identify themselves as contributors? Like much that is done in secret politically, this is wrong and harmful to our democracy. Because something is legal, it does not follow that it morally right.

Mr_B

October 18th, 2010
7:58 pm

Need to check out and prepare a midterm exam for the kiddies. Y’all play nice, now.

Disgusted

October 18th, 2010
7:58 pm

We are so screwed. I’ve been steaming all day about the powerful Rep. Henry Waxman, who’s in the pocket of so many unions and healthcare firm. Yes, it seems that our great leader, who has conducted committee hearings against the tobacco industry, is himself a major cigar smoker. Worse, he doesn’t pay his cigar store bills. When he was contacted about an overdue account at JR Tobacco, his response was a suggestion that the supplier write the bill off as a campaign contribution to—who else? himself. With this kind of lack of integrity, what does it matter who buys Congress?

Jay

October 18th, 2010
7:59 pm

I can think of several ways to answer your question, Josef.

One, there’s a limit on how much an individual person can give to a campaign, and that contribution is disclosed. There is no limit on how much a corporation can spend in “independent expenditures,” and no disclosure if funneled through the Chamber or one of Karl Rove’s little outfits.

Two, a person speaking in a normal voice may theoretically have the same free-speech rights as the person standing next to him, but if that next “person” has a microphone connected to the combined sound systems of the Rolling Stones and U-2, the first person’s message is not likely to be heard.

And three, even the Supremes acknowledge a legitimate public interest in limiting donations if they increase the changes of corruption. But this supposedly nonactivist court overruled members of Congress, who have actual, firsthand knowledge of such matters, and decided for itself that corruption wasn’t a serious problem.

I’m not buying that one.

Dusty

October 18th, 2010
7:59 pm

Ho hum….

If you took away ALL the big corporations how many jobs would you have left? Huh??? If you took away all the taxes they pay what would you have left? Huh?

‘Cuse me but I think big coporations are the backbone of America. No matter how much they invest in candidates, Americans are still the ones who vote. If we are so gullible, we will get what we deserve anyway.

Judge Kennedy was right. Corporations declare what they spend on elections. That is not corrupt.

Bookman is just angry ’cause liberal politicians do not get all the corporation money. That with the consistent wealth envy makes him search even harder. Oh the injustice (as long as Dems don’t get the money). Bookman…..a worker for the “cause”.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:08 pm

JAY
Point One…they just play the game better is all…there’s nothing to stop me from funneling my donations through some organization and give, give, give…not, mind you, that I approve…

Point Two–
Much of what is at work with the AJC et al. and Monds, eh?

Point Three–
Congress? Corruption? Isn’t this somewhat akin to Paracelsus’ two wh*res discussing chastity?

I’m not buying this…

Plain and simple, get rid of the private financing of campaigns and let the lobbyists run full tilt boogie elsewhere, but it’s campaign reform which is at the crux of the problem and you ain’t gonna get much support for that at Belle Watling’s…

barking frog

October 18th, 2010
8:09 pm

No one is obligated to vote for anyone just because he is urged
to do so by any advertising. The uproar about corporate donations
is just another way of saying you should not underestimate the
stupidity of the American people. Reporting of donations and
expenditures, if policed well, stop corruption of the process.

Soothsayer

October 18th, 2010
8:10 pm

Jay, we’re all focked!

On a different note. Your church, synagogue, temple, what have you desperately needs you right now! Support your local church, synagogue. temple. Give back a portion of what has been given to you. Give thanks to God for your trials and they will end. Give thanks to God for your blessings and they will continue.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:15 pm

BTW

Granny just turned over in her grave…I actually sent a GOP organization some shekels…the Log Cabin Republicans…! Way to go, you right wing fascist pigs! :-)

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
8:17 pm

I’ll add a couple of things to Jay’s points. A shareholder is a partial owner of a corporation. The profits of the corporation belong to the shareholders. The managers/executives are hired to manage the company and thus make decisions as to how to best utilize that profit whether it be by dividends, investments, buying up shares etc. These companies are simply using the shareholder’s money as their own personal slush fund. If an individual shareholder WANTS his profits to go to politics then so be it. But without individual shareholder approval, political participation becomes a compulsory activity of stock ownership and participation in this area of the economy. Same goes for unions. Union dues should not be used for political donations without the approval of the union member. It cuts both ways IMO.

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
8:18 pm

Dusty,
The PEOPLE are the backbone of this country.

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
8:19 pm

Oh, and on another happy note, charitable contributions are at a 20 year low but the political contributions keep pouring in.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:21 pm

Don’t Forget

Which is why I am highly selective in where I invest my pieniądze…

A. Sandwich

October 18th, 2010
8:22 pm

Jay, the scope of the Tea Party’s concerns are narrow — less filing, taste great.

Jay

October 18th, 2010
8:25 pm

Campaign reform, Josef?

Citizens United pretty much took the whole concept off the table.

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:26 pm

Sorry Jay, but corporations don’t vote. Dollar bills don’t vote. Political leaders are elected by people.

Sometimes people don’t vote the way Democrats would like, and that’s all this is about.

Democrats are already working on their excuses for why they got fired.

Jefferson

October 18th, 2010
8:26 pm

The tea republicans are just republicans without credibility, but with a new one for you.

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:27 pm

Kind of funny how the folks decrying the Citizens United decision never tell us about the underlying case. And no wonder–most Americans would surely side with Citizens United if they new the facts.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:31 pm

JAY
Much to the relief of your local representative…a win win situation…blame “them” and keep lining your pockets…

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
8:31 pm

If corporations are people, how is it that I can own part of one?

paleo-neoCarlinist

October 18th, 2010
8:32 pm

wow. this is really all coming together. on one hand, corporations are soul-less beasts. on the other hand, I like it like that, because the very concept of a “soul” as some sort of innate, altrusistic energy is rooted in the delusional, soul-less concept of religion. but then again, the Constitution ensures individual liberty, and the right of Congress to “regulate Commerce”. of course, “Commerce” figured out early on, it could “regulate Congress” via lobbyists ($$$). the blood is on the hands of every voter who continues to re-elect the shameless pimps who present themselves as “representatives”. JB, this isn’t news; it’s American History 101

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:32 pm

Don’t Forget: without individual shareholder approval, political participation becomes a compulsory activity of stock ownership
—————–

Sell your shares if you have a problem with it. Duh.

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
8:33 pm

Josef,
I think I should be able to invest in any business I choose without being compelled to contribute to a political viewpoint I don’t agree with.

Don't Forget

October 18th, 2010
8:34 pm

LBB, if I own shares, it’s MY money. Tell those board members to get their hands off MY money.

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:35 pm

Well, you’re wrong. You have no such right.

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:36 pm

You gave the managers your money to manage for you. If you don’t like the job they’re doing, sell your shares. You don’t get to run the company unless you control 51% of the shares, so either sell or shut up.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:37 pm

Lil’ Barry
It’s a rare occasion when I agree with you, but on 8:32, I do…and believe me, when I sell, I let them know why, too…not that it really means that much, but at least I’m on record as such…

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:40 pm

josef, I’m glad I don’t have to explain stock ownership to EVERYONE here! ;-)

AmVet

October 18th, 2010
8:40 pm

Justice Stevens, in dissent, was compelled to state the obvious:

…corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires. Corporations help structure and facilitate the activities of human beings, to be sure, and their “personhood” often serves as a useful legal fiction. But they are not themselves members of “We the People” by whom and for whom our Constitution was established.

Somebody above wrote “Sorry if I’m not buying the “sky is falling” argument”. And they are correct.

But rest assured that that blogger almost certainly has no idea whatsoever that this is just the latest in a very long line of decisions allowing the “monied interests” as Thomas Jefferson called them, to continue usurping the people’s supreme and independent power and authority in government.

Our Bill of Rights was the result of tremendous efforts to institutionalize and protect the rights of human beings. It strengthened the premise of our Constitution: that the people are the root of all power and authority for government. This vision has made our Constitution and government a model emulated in many nations.

But corporate lawyers (acting as both attorneys and judges) *subverted* our Bill of Rights in the late 1800’s by establishing the doctrine of “corporate personhood” — the claim that corporations were intended to fully enjoy the legal status and protections created for human beings.

Corporations are not persons and possess only the privileges we willfully grant them. Granting corporations the status of legal “persons” effectively rewrites the Constitution to serve corporate interests as though they were human interests. Ultimately, the doctrine of granting constitutional rights to corporations gives a thing illegitimate privilege and power that undermines our freedom and authority as citizens. While corporations are setting the agenda on issues in our Congress and courts, We the People are not; for we can never speak as loudly with our own voices as corporations can with the unlimited amplification of money.

The last point the one that Jay made so well…

A travesty and disgraceful justification that MONEY trumps everything – even our sacred sovereignty.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:41 pm

Don’t Forget…

And I think Grandma should have wheels so she’d be a trolley car…

It’s bidness and it’s the way the game is played…I’m not real fond of it myself, but like I said, I put my money where my mouth is…

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:43 pm

AmVet

Yep, back in the Age of the Robber Barons…another gift from the Party of Lincoln in power… :-)

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
8:44 pm

I still don’t believe in the concept of “corporate personhood”. Guess I’m still stuck in the first part of the 19th century on that one.

barking frog

October 18th, 2010
8:44 pm

Lil’ Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:36 pm
You don’t get to run the company unless you control 51% of the shares, so either sell or shut up.

——————————————————————————–
That’s the democratic nature of corporations, however you can
become an activist shareholder and maybe persuade other
shareholders or management to your position

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:44 pm

“The last point the one that Jay made so well…”

While avoiding the Monds comment…same song, different dance…

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:44 pm

Jay: there’s a limit on how much an individual person can give to a campaign, and that contribution is disclosed. There is no limit on how much a corporation can spend in “independent expenditures”
——————-

I don’t believe there’s a limit on how much an individual can spend in independent expenditures, either.

The case of Citizens United involved a group of people who pooled their independent expenditures to produce a move critical of a political candidate. McCain-Feingold made it illegal for them to have this movie seen. Now, that might have been OK in Nazi Germany, but it doesn’t seem to comport with our First Amendment.

The Supreme Court got it right, and the Idiot Messiah and his acolytes are all wrong.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:45 pm

Hillbilly…
Still longing for the days before the Wah-uh, ‘er ye? :-)

barking frog

October 18th, 2010
8:48 pm

Political Parties are quasi corporations, as is the USA with the
dollar being the share.

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
8:48 pm

josef

Somebody has to fight the hopeless fights…………

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU6mq8kR7Ng

Scout

October 18th, 2010
8:51 pm

Mr_B :

I don’t think we have exchanged before but happy to meet you and have a very pleasant evening.

WAYNE ALLYN ROOT: Overwhelm the System

“Barrack Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos — thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.

Barack Obama is my college classmate ( Columbia University , class of ‘83). As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University . They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they’re alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival … and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

– Universal health care. The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn’t care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?

– Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama’s biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kickback hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama “spread the wealth around.”

– Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who’s asking for a 51st state? Who’s asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Obama’s plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

– Legalize 12 million illegal immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America . But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security.

– Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions — including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues). All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America . The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means.

– Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition.

With the acts outlined above, Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system.

Add it up and you’ve got the perfect Marxist scheme — all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Obama using the Cloward and Piven Plan.”

Scout

October 18th, 2010
8:52 pm

Don’t Forget:

Please capitalize “Marines”. We thank you.

AmVet

October 18th, 2010
8:52 pm

josef, I know you say so with tongue in cheek as an Abe hater!

But THIS matter is of enormous importance and those here who try to define it in terms of Democrat vs. Republican obviously belong at the children’s table.

http://tinyurl.com/3y9txwf

We cannot have equal justice under law between real people and corporations like Exxon Mobil.

Multinational corporations can be in 1000 places around the world at the same time obstructing governments, states, buying and renting politicians, and going to Washington to get bailed out by taxpayers.

Congress did not legislate corporate personhood. The courts performed this jolting display of runaway activism all by themselves.

The courts destroyed the semblance of equal protection under law because there is no way even an individual billionaire can approximate the raw power of these large corporations with their privileged immunities, and their control over technology, capital and labor.

I will continue to advocate that we subordinate the artificial corporate entity to the constitutional sovereignty of the people. Right now it is the reverse. The sovereignty of the people is subordinated to the sovereignty of the giant multinational corporations.

But the constitution still reads, “we the people”, not we the corporations.

Corporations were chartered in the early nineteenth century by state governments to be our servants, not our masters.

They are now our masters.

And the astonishing thing is how some Americans are so damn gullible they actually believe this is a good thing!

Complete and cowardly sell outs…

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
8:55 pm

Hillbilly
Ole Alonzo is my role model…one of my family’s pet names for me…

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
8:55 pm

By the way, Citizens United and MoveOn.org are both organized as 501(c)(4). If MoveOn.org had made a movie critical of our President Bush and was not permitted to have it seen, I’m pretty sure the libbtards would have been screaming about their free speech rights.

Hypocrites.

paleo-neoCarlinist

October 18th, 2010
8:57 pm

barking frog, correct – and the politicians are the board of directors. contrary to the observations of some, publicly traded corporations are not “democratic” they are “plutocratic”. like the government, the vote of a single shareholder means nothing in terms of policy or “governing”. the “ruling class” does what it wants.

Hillbilly Deluxe

October 18th, 2010
9:00 pm

There is a book, “The First Tycoon: The Epic Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt” by T J Stiles. Although it’s biography of Vanderbilt, it gives an interesting overview, of what corporations started out as, in this country and how they started on the road to what we have today.

Lil' Barry Bailout

October 18th, 2010
9:01 pm

If the dollar is a share in the US, the shares are being diluted by the Idiot Messiah and the Fed. Of course, that’s of no consequence to the parasite class that votes Democrat.

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
9:02 pm

AmVet
When court activism comes down on my side, good, When it comes down on the other side, bad. Do you suggest, then, that we take the Jacksonian approach, “the Supreme Court ruled, now let’s see them enforce it?” It worked for him, maybe it can work for us, now…

barking frog

October 18th, 2010
9:05 pm

paleo-neoCarlinist

October 18th, 2010
8:57 pm
like the government, the vote of a single shareholder means nothing in terms of policy or “governing”. the “ruling class” does what it wants.
————————————————————
I would contend that the Republicans and Democrats would
disagree in light of the expectations of November 2….

AmVet

October 18th, 2010
9:07 pm

Only 40 percent of Americans think corporations make a positive contribution to the public good. And as for public trust, large global corporations are at “the bottom of the list — beneath nongovernmental organizations, small regional companies, the United Nations, labor unions and the media.”

Simply put, corporations control most aspects of American lives and that is why such a large percentage of Americans, more than 3 out of 4, now believe these multi-national corporations – with NO allegiance to Uncle Sam – have too much power over their lives and over our government.

Ill-gotten power, they never deserved. And have abused.

And as I noted before, they are now the masters and we the people are their servants.

getalife

October 18th, 2010
9:11 pm

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
9:13 pm

barking frog

The vote of a single citizen certainly meant a lot back in the day of the hanging chads! But hey, the Supremes rescued us then, too :-)

AmVet

October 18th, 2010
9:16 pm

Again, josef, these are NOT constitutionally derived rights.

They are arguably the very antithesis to that most sacred document ever written.

We are now on the edge of an American plutocracy – a government or state in which the wealthy class rules – are we not?

20% of all Americans own 84% of all the wealth in this country.

And I have NO reason to believe that soon it will not be 10% owning 94% of all the wealth in this country.

How does one explain that?

How can that possibly exist in the United States of America?

How can that, even in the most deluded neo-cons brains, be a good thing for the Republic?

IT CANNOT.

And it must not.

One more time.

“The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace, and it conspires against it in times of adversity. It’s more despotic than monarchy. It’s more insolent than autocracy. It’s more selfish than bureaucracy. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the republic is destroyed. Written in the late 1800s and (Mis?) attributed to Abraham Lincoln

But whoever wrote it was a seer of the future and a damn genius…

barking frog

October 18th, 2010
9:17 pm

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
9:13 pm
————————————–
oh well hanging judges preceded hanging chads,
if only they had left us well hung…..

josef nix

October 18th, 2010
9:22 pm

AmVet
The Supreme Court rules on what is and what is not Constitutional…right now, it’s Constitutional…the Supremes said so and until they change their minds, that’s what we’ll be dealing with…

TBA2010

October 18th, 2010
9:22 pm

No Obama steam, Gallup’s generic congressional poll finds; Republican lead holding strong 15 days out

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/10/republicans-lead-in-gallup-generic-congressional-poll.html

Jackie

October 18th, 2010
9:23 pm

@Li’l Barry

I would wager that you do not know why the Fed chose to spend more money on buying Treasuries? Care to help us understand what we are missing?

barking frog

October 18th, 2010
9:26 pm

In a capitalistic economy the people with capital will generally
have the most power unless under a democratic society the people
allow the government to indiscriminately confiscate capital.

Dusty

October 18th, 2010
9:36 pm

I bet everyone here is using a product, a service, or a commodity furnished by a big corporation. We are a big country and it takes something big to take care of us.

Go ahead and act like corporations are the ogres of the century. They should make money and let YOU handle it. You should tell their managers where the money should go.

Unless you are a total wimp. you should be able to decide what politician you want to put in office. When half the voters of America don’t even show up at the polls then you have let anybody run this country that tries to do so. If a politician takes a “ton” of money from a business of any kind, then don’t vote for them.

If you think corporations are illegal with their funds, we do have a justice system. That system has already said what they consider legal for corporate donations. So you are smarter? Uh huh. IN the meantime, just go out and vote. If you don’t, quit griping.