GOP: Massive campaign donations should be secret

From the LA Times:

“WASHINGTON — During their long campaign to loosen rules on campaign money, conservatives argued that there was a simpler way to prevent corruption: transparency. Get rid of limits on contributions and spending, they said, but make sure voters know where the money is coming from.

Today, with those fundraising restrictions largely removed, many conservatives have changed their tune. They now say disclosure could be an enemy of free speech.

High-profile donors could face bullying and harassment from liberals out to “muzzle” their opponents, Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a recent speech.

Corporations could be subject to boycotts and pickets, warned the Wall Street Journal editorial page this spring.

Democrats “want to intimidate people into not giving to these conservative efforts,” said Republican strategist Karl Rove on Fox News. “I think it’s shameful.”

The Times’ story goes on to document a wide-ranging effort by conservative groups to undermine, dismantle and evade laws intended to force disclosure of who is giving how much money to who. They are also aggressively abusing a loophole in regulations that allow nonprofit groups to collect hundreds of millions of dollars in anonymous donations — under the guise that they are social-welfare organizations — and use that anonymous money to buy campaign ads.

The Federal Election Commission, which has the legal authority and even obligation to intervene, has been rendered incapable of doing so. In an all-too-familiar pattern, the commission’s three Republican members are blocking its three Democratic members from taking action to force disclosure that the law clearly requires. (See Van Hollen v. FEC).

As a result, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the public and the media to “follow the money,” the traditional means to trace how big money in the political system produces favorable outcomes for those doing the giving.

The excuse for such secrecy is that large donors fear a backlash should their involvement become public. Poor little sensitive dears.

What do they think happens when John Q. Public writes a letter to the editor of the local newspaper, puts a campaign sign in his front yard or a bumper sticker on his car?

Why should they be exempt from disclosing contributions measured in the millions of dollars, while Jane Q. Public’s little $500 contribution to a candidate ends up in a FEC database accessible to her employer, her family and friends and everyone else with an Internet connection?

As one prominent jurist noted back in 2010:

“Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed. For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously and even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism.”

Of course, given that the jurist in question was Justice Antonin Scalia, he may be singing a different tune now, given the partisan turn this issue has taken.

– Jay Bookman

757 comments Add your comment

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

June 27th, 2012
9:36 am

Two points:

1) Jay talking about “transparency” with his secretive president in the White House is _____________ (fill in the blank).

2) “or a bumper sticker on his car?”

Warning ………. if you put a conservative bumper sticker on your vehicle, don’t be surprised if a lib. “keys” your said vehicle.

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
9:36 am

So Jay only wants certain laws enforced with discretion.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

June 27th, 2012
9:36 am

Well how can you be secretly bought and paid for if everyone knows who is pulling the puppet strings?

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 27th, 2012
9:36 am

They can hide there massive donations but mine are easily google-able.

If those coporations are people, then I am being discriminated against
in favor of those peop-orations.

And that’s fair and right how?

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 27th, 2012
9:38 am

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
9:36 am
So Jay only wants certain laws enforced with discretion.

Ty

I bet you do too.

Would you like us to start prosecuting the torture group now?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

June 27th, 2012
9:39 am

Warning ………. if you put a conservative bumper sticker on your vehicle, don’t be surprised if a lib. “keys” your said vehicle

This from a poster who has a fettish about an employer walking through the employee parking lot and firing everyone with an Obama sticker…….. Sometimes the “warning” says more about the poster than the false claim itself.

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
9:41 am

“I bet you do too.”

you shouldn’t be betting granny…Obama needs all the disposable money he can get from you.

Talking Head

June 27th, 2012
9:42 am

I wonder if this piece is in response to Obama saying that he will be outspent in this election? Hmmmmm

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 27th, 2012
9:44 am

“Warning ………. if you put a conservative bumper sticker on your vehicle, don’t be surprised if a lib. “keys” your said vehicle”

Funny thing about that…..I had my car car vandalized several times and my home as well last 2 election cycles.

and not a single conservative bumper sticker…

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

June 27th, 2012
9:44 am

JAY,

I don’t hold SCOTUS to blame for interpreting ancient constitution as such….amendment is needed but of course will not serve the interests of our corrupt (DEMS and GOP) politicians.

Of course all donors to these anti-taxpayer tools should be exposed….our whole government is a joke, completely impotent and controlled by cash….disgusting….not sure what is solutions since any politician who proposes a fix will find well funded competition when up for re-election.

I don’t see the DEMs as being any less guilty, provided the opportunity of GOP in this vein…any suggestions to the contrary are naive.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 27th, 2012
9:45 am

ty

do you want us to start proceeding against the torture group or not?

why did you avoid the question?

Soothsayer

June 27th, 2012
9:45 am

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

June 27th, 2012
9:45 am

Join the debate …………….. :o

“Rep. Steve Israel of New York, the House Democrats’ campaign chief, is telling candidates to avoid the party’s national convention. Israel’s admonition comes as a growing list of Democrats say they will not be joining their fellow partisans in Charlotte, N.C. And Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, one of the Democratic Party’s most vulnerable candidates, will not attend, an aide said.

Are Democratic candidates wise to try and distance themselves from President Obama?”

http://www.politico.com/arena/

mm

June 27th, 2012
9:45 am

We have a clear choice to make this November.

You either support the party that only cares about the corporations of this country.

OR

You support the party that cares about the citizens of this country.

USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout

June 27th, 2012
9:46 am

just remember, boys and girls … if George Soros wants to pour millions into the campaigns, it’s bad.

if the Koch brothers want to pour millions into the campaigns, it’s democracy in action.

(or is that democracy inaction?)

Adam

June 27th, 2012
9:46 am

Scout: Transparency is:

Knowing about the “secret” drone strike war
Knowing about the “secret” killing of Osama bin Laden
Knowing about the “secret” kill list
Knowing about the “secret” Fast and Furious plan
Knowing about the “secret” places the stimulus money went
Knowing about the “secret” donations in most other cases of poiticians

Yeah, no transparency there, because we don’t know ANY of that stuff. Cuz it’s a secret, doncha know.

Peadawg

June 27th, 2012
9:46 am

Damn…Obama Obama Obama on the 1st post. Nice.

“GOP: Massive campaign donations should be secret” – Nope, not even a little bit. I don’t have a problem w/ unlimited campaign donations but they shouldn’t be secret.

Paul

June 27th, 2012
9:47 am

For once, I look forward to a Scout Bible quote about those who do their deeds in secret, where there is no light, who seek to cover their sins and who are speakers of the word but not doers of the word.

My understanding is Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS is established as a non-profit devoted to promoting social welfare and discussion issues. As such, donors can be anonymous. Problem is, Crossroads funds attack ads against specific candidates. I wondered how they got away with it. After reading this column, I know how.

Adam

June 27th, 2012
9:48 am

Sometimes the “warning” says more about the poster than the false claim itself.

THIS

Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people

June 27th, 2012
9:48 am

On topic- if democrats are ready to require that ALL NON PROFIT contributions have to be disclosed, fine by me.

I’m betting a lot if non profits wouldn’t be a fan, especially the abortion clinic folks, to cite but one example

Taxpayer (from downstairs)

Earthworks Action is not any sort of remotely recognized scientific group

Try harder

mm

June 27th, 2012
9:48 am

“Are Democratic candidates wise to try and distance themselves from President Obama?”

No, they are just spineless DINOs.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

June 27th, 2012
9:49 am

Headline (POLITICO): “Dems go AWOL in class war”

“Labor unions hoped to turn the Wisconsin recall election into a rallying cause for their ailing movement. But a Democratic president couldn’t be dragged off the sidelines for the fight.

Anti-Wall Street activists were itching to see JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon bashed like a piñata at a congressional hearing just two weeks after his firm blew $2 billion in risky speculation. But Democratic senators greeted him with flowers, not fury.

And, as President Barack Obama attempts to make Mitt Romney’s history as a wealthy buyout artist a centerpiece of his 2012 message, he is second-guessed and hushed by some of the leading voices in his own party.

What the hell ever happened to populism in the Democratic Party?”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77878.html#ixzz1z090cBvl

USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout

June 27th, 2012
9:49 am

“Are Democratic candidates wise to try and distance themselves from President Obama?””

:lol:

more like distancing themselves from the racist and homophobic North Carolina.

Why bother

June 27th, 2012
9:50 am

Once again, nice piece Jay, and worthy of discussion. However the peanut gallery has already devolved this into another finger pointing, “what about Obama?” diatribe. Sadly I shall once again just digest the material and move on….

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
9:51 am

Granny,
wouldn’t bother me if you/they did…though you/they have no case.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

June 27th, 2012
9:51 am

“I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.”

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 27th, 2012
9:52 am

What are they hiding from? Shouldn’t be so skeered.

Steve

June 27th, 2012
9:52 am

Can you people stick to the topic? Seriously…

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

June 27th, 2012
9:53 am

Adam:

From yesterday ………….

“What the hell kind of logical backflips and cognitive dissonance rattles around in your head to come up with the people who WROTE THE CONSTITUTION “just have an opinion.”

Point #1: Jefferson had nothing to do with drafting the Constitution. He was Ambassador to France at the time. Just sayin’.

Point #2 The founding fathers were wise enough to draft a Constitution that would ignore their “personal” future opinions …………. most of whom felt that slavery was Contitutional.

TaxPayer

June 27th, 2012
9:53 am

Warning ………. if you put a conservative bumper sticker on your vehicle, don’t be surprised if a lib. “keys” your said vehicle

Scout and his potholes.

USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout

June 27th, 2012
9:53 am

“Yeah, no transparency there, because we don’t know ANY of that stuff. Cuz it’s a secret, doncha know.”

oh, way to go Adam … now EVERYone will know …

;-)

TaxPayer

June 27th, 2012
9:54 am

Tax those contributions and use them to pay down the national debt. Ninety percent tax rate.

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
9:54 am

“more like distancing themselves from the racist and homophobic North Carolina.”

that went for Obama in 2008.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

June 27th, 2012
9:54 am

Excuse me: “Constitutional”

Proud to be me

June 27th, 2012
9:55 am

There’s nothing SECRET anymore!!!

Thomas

June 27th, 2012
9:55 am

Tax cheats were given $1.4 billion in government-backed mortgage loans under President Obama’s economic stimulus, and the government doled out at least an additional $27 million in tax credits to delinquents who took the first-time-homebuyer tax break, according to a government audit released Wednesday.

Under government rules, delinquent taxpayers are supposed to be ineligible for the mortgage insurance program unless they have reached a repayment agreement with the Internal Revenue Service. But the Federal Housing Administration didn’t have the right controls to weed out bad applications, said the Government Accountability Office, Congress‘ chief investigative arm.

We need a third stimulus to ensure taxpayer money is redistributed to folks with no business plan and tax cheats- gotta love the gov’t as it is the only entity that makes Enron look pristine

How can a company be corrupt, pay or not pay taxes- how does a company “do” anything. A company is simply articles of incorporation.

Simply make everything transparent- if monies are flowing from the MidEast or China for a candidate, from a union, from a neocon arms dealers- simply make it transparent so everyone knows.

I thought that is what Obama wanted- transparency

Keep Up the Good Fight!

June 27th, 2012
9:56 am

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has launched an investigation into the contributions of “tax-exempt groups that are heavily involved in political campaigns, focusing on a case involving the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has been one of the largest outside groups seeking to influence recent elections but is not required to disclose its donors,” the New York Times reports. Schneiderman is “seeking e-mails, bank records and other documents to determine whether the foundation illegally funneled $18 million to the chamber for political and lobbying activities.” The Chamber spent $66 million on lobbying in 2011 and has “pledged to spend at least $50 million on issue ads during the 2012 election cycle.” Recent reports have revealed that health insurers funneled at least $102.4 million through the Chamber in an effort to defeat Obamacare and undermine its implementation.

Hmmm… secrecy allows laws to be broken.

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
9:56 am

“Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed. For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously and even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism.”

Of course, given that the jurist in question was Justice Antonin Scalia, he may be singing a different tune now, given the partisan turn this issue has taken.

So, in true political fashion, he was for it before he was against it. Just shows that in the US, he who has the money gets to make the rules. Sad to see that there are people who actually cheer this crap on.

Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!

June 27th, 2012
9:56 am

Welcome to the Occupation

June 27th, 2012
9:56 am

I saw the clip of that Karl Rove performance on FOX yesterday. Absolutely one for the ages.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
9:56 am

As conservatives said about warrantless wiretapping, ‘if you don’t have anything to hide, then you don’t have anything to worry about.’

Same goes for campaign finance contributions. If you’re not trying to hide something, then revealing the source of the donations shouldn’t be a problem for you.

OTOH, if it *is* a problem for you, then perhaps you’re not the person people should be voting for.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 27th, 2012
9:57 am

ty

thanks for responding.

as far as no case….well folks WERE tortured.

Thomas Heyward Jr.

June 27th, 2012
9:58 am

When I think of Obama/Romney supporters………..I think of some “shades of gray” sexual technics.
.
Obey your rulers……….keep getting abused………..because you LIKE it.
.
Thank you Sir………may I have another.
.
Romney/Obama supportors.
.
Girly men…….all.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
9:59 am

0311 — “Warning ………. if you put a conservative bumper sticker on your vehicle, don’t be surprised if a lib. “keys” your said vehicle.”

I’ll raise you a Coke bottle, thrown at my car while both my car and the thrower’s car were in motion. I had a Veterans For Kerry bumpersticker.

Oh, yes, and as the chimp got into the adjacent turn lane to make his escape (I was going straight), I was able to see that he had a USMC window sticker. Maybe it was you that did it.

USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout

June 27th, 2012
9:59 am

“that went for Obama in 2008″

maybe so … but how do you go on to effectively endorse a state that has so blatantly voted against one of your basic principles of equality for everyone???

TaxPayer

June 27th, 2012
9:59 am

Jm,

Feel free to disprove the content with your own analysis. I anxiously await an opportunity to review your expert analysis on the topic. And since you did not notice, they reference experts such as Halliburton and scientists from USGS, etc. I suspect however you will continue with more of the same–your expert opinion. :lol:

godless heathen

June 27th, 2012
10:00 am

Earthworks Action is not any sort of remotely recognized scientific group

How can you say that? They have a Dentist on their Board of Directors.

DawgDad

June 27th, 2012
10:03 am

“many conservatives have changed their tune”

Who? How many is “many”? One? Two? Of course there are some in the GOP who feel this way. There have been Democratic donors and bundlers who didn’t want to go public, too. I can pretty well assure you the majority base of conservative voters supports transparency. Might try running a poll on that.

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
10:04 am

UsinUk,
I don’t agree with the majority opinion of NC’ians regarding same sex marriage…that being said, it was left up to that state(a process obama has endorsed, despite his “personal” feelings on the issue). As for “racist”…funny that NC wasn’t called that after the 2008 election…hmmmmm

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
10:04 am

Jm — “On topic- if democrats are ready to require that ALL NON PROFIT contributions have to be disclosed, fine by me. I’m betting a lot if non profits wouldn’t be a fan, especially the abortion clinic folks, to cite but one example”

You pretty clearly don’t know what a Form 990 is.

http://www.guidestar.org/rxg/help/faqs/form-990/index.aspx#faq1951

If you want changes to the policy, talk to your elected representatives.

You might also want to try exerting a little effort to find that information, as this took me all of four seconds to find:

http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/contrib.php?cmte=Planned+Parenthood&type=A&cycle=2012

SwamiDave

June 27th, 2012
10:05 am

USinUK:

“more like distancing themselves from the racist and homophobic North Carolina.”

Sure, at-risk officeholders and candidates in swing states (the majority of which have similar laws that passed with similiar margins in state-wide elections) are distancing themselves from North Carolina.

Thanks for today’s early morning entertainment!

-SD

Erwin's cat

June 27th, 2012
10:05 am

“In an all-too-familiar pattern, the commission’s three Republican members are blocking its three Democratic members from taking action to force disclosure that the law clearly requires. ”

An agreed stalemate, I’m sure ….all too familiar is right

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
10:05 am

usinuk,
oh, and the same goes for CA.

Jefferson

June 27th, 2012
10:06 am

Having your car damaged is a reality.

kayaker 71

June 27th, 2012
10:09 am

Bozo has been on over 175 money raising trips on the taxpayer dime to raise money for his hopeless campaign. If he had the money donated to him and his cronies that the Republicans had raised, Bookman would not be posting this. But the Imaculated One is way behind in campaign donations, even wanting those who are getting married to forgo wedding presents and donate the money to his campaign. He also wants those who have birthdays to donate the money that someone would have spent, to his sorry campaign, to continue to destroy this country. And, walllah….. someone is going to get to have dinner with Bozo and Bozoette if they win the grand prize. Jes…… I can’t wait.

Stonethrower

June 27th, 2012
10:10 am

He who has the gold rules. We have best government money can buy!

Top super PAC donors

June 27th, 2012
10:10 am

The 9 largest super PAC donors have collectively donated over $60 million to various political causes. Who are these guys?

Super PAC donations: $25,000,000
Political orientation: Conservative
Donation ranking: 1

Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam have a lot of money — and they aren’t afraid to use it for political purposes.

During the rough-and-tumble primary season, the couple donated $20 million to Winning Our Future, a super PAC with ties to former House speaker Newt Gingrich.

The donations, which were used to finance attack ads against Mitt Romney, are largely credited with keeping Gingrich in the race while his campaign struggled to raise money.

A $5 million donation was later returned by the super PAC after Gingrich abandoned his bid.

Adelson plans to spend even more to support Republican efforts this fall. He has already given $10 million to Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney super PAC.

Adelson, the current CEO of Las Vegas Sands, isn’t likely to stop there. His total donations this cycle might top $100 million, with some of that going to groups that are not required to disclose their donors.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/news/economy/1206/gallery.super-pac-donors-politics/index.html

St Simons - he-ne-ha

June 27th, 2012
10:11 am

3 words – de-li-cious

-yes, cons, you have a right to privacy.
-until you tattoo citizens united to your ass & parade around the village
laughing into the camera.

man, i never get tired of con karma.
quit leading with your chin, cons

USinUK - pro-gay-marriage thug and former Girl Scout

June 27th, 2012
10:11 am

ty – at least CA’s was overturned

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
10:13 am

I can pretty well assure you the majority base of conservative voters supports transparency.

And how many of those conservative voters who support transparency would be the very bundlers and high dollar donors being discussed?

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 27th, 2012
10:14 am

May I suggest a review of the Disclose act and why the GOP never let it go anywhere…..

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:15 am

I support the putative “Republican” position. The identity of the speaker has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the statement – the contrary view is the only theoretical basis for requiring disclosure of the identity of a donor.

The rational basis for protecting the privacy of donors is the well-documented pattern of misbehavior by loopy leftists and union thugs, threatening the lives and property of donors to causes opposed by the screwy-brained.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
10:15 am

Top Donors — “Adelson plans to spend even more to support Republican efforts this fall. He has already given $10 million to Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney super PAC.”

“Adelson, the current CEO of Las Vegas Sands, isn’t likely to stop there. His total donations this cycle might top $100 million, with some of that going to groups that are not required to disclose their donors.”

Given that many Mormons don’t touch caffeinated beverages, believing that a religious injunction against strong drink prohibits them from doing so, I wonder how Romney is able to square his religious convictions with accepting money earned from gambling ventures?

Then again, he sat on the Board of the Marriott Corporation, which has made money for years from the sale of pay-per-view pr0n in ole Bill Marriott’s hotels, so p’raps Mr. Romney’s principles really *are* for sale to the highest bidder.

Adam

June 27th, 2012
10:15 am

Scout: But slavery WAS Constitutional until we amended the Constitution. No such amendment exists that would restrict what the government can tell you to buy. And until tomorrow, no such Supreme Court decision exists with that restriction either.

USMC

June 27th, 2012
10:16 am

“GOP: Massive campaign donations should be secret”–JAY BOOKMAN

Get Jay a Fainting Couch…

What about OBAMA’s OVERSEAS donations where they cannot identify the sourse…. LOL!

Bookman, your dishonesty and partisan politics are despicable. :-)

ty webb

June 27th, 2012
10:17 am

“at least CA’s was overturned”

usinuk,
you’re(not “your”, see, I got it right this time) right, the courts overturned it…though the people voted against same sex marriage(just like NC) and CA also went for Obama in 2008(just like NC)…yet you don’t call CA, “racist” and “Homophobic”…like you did with NC.

Jefferson

June 27th, 2012
10:17 am

Bribes and whores.

Adam

June 27th, 2012
10:17 am

Jm: My solution for campaign finance reform:

Ideal: All public, no private. All from taxes. Flat same amount given to any candidate from any party in a particular race.

What I hope they at least do: Disclosure everywhere, if the ad even remotely addresses a political issue or candidate. Limits on how much contribution can be made, whether from a union, a corporation, or an individual.

What I think will be done: Expansion of who can donate and how much, expansion of what organizations and persons can do this without disclosure.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
10:17 am

R. Danneskjold — “I support the putative “Republican” position.”

Do you really think any of us here hadn’t clued in to that *before* you said it? :roll:

JF McNamara

June 27th, 2012
10:17 am

“High-profile donors could face bullying and harassment from liberals out to “muzzle” their opponents, Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a recent speech.”

Free speech does not mean that you can say whatever you want and not face consequences or opposition. It just means that you will not be prosecuted by the government. People are making free speech into more than what it really is.

You are still accountable for what you say and do, and you should not be protected from “bullying”. If you believe in the cause that much, it’s worth overcoming “bullying”. The other side has just as much right to free speech as you do. If you can’t handle opposition then perhaps its something you shouldn’t be doing.

Adam

June 27th, 2012
10:18 am

Erwin’s Cat: An agreed stalemate

You have a strange view on what qualifies as “agreed”

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:19 am

The essay topic gained impetus with the publishing of Chairman Ann’s recent book, “Demonic,” which reasonably compares leftist campaigns with mindless mob behavior. The subsequent “Occupy” movement gave the topic a push.

Paul

June 27th, 2012
10:19 am

As one noted, right out of the box the comments were ‘what about Obama?” followed by unrelated news posts and other attempts at diversion.

Not ONE post making the case why donors to these groups should be allowed to do their deeds in secret. Jay must be correct: they’re scared. They don’t have the courage to state their convictions publicly. Poor little dears…

Jay

Rule of Thumb: When points are made in the column and bloggers do not attempt to make even a weak challenge, the points you made are valid.

Another think I can’t figure out: why do those who cannot make even a lame attempt to justify their party’s policies continue to adhere to strongly to them?

Adam

June 27th, 2012
10:20 am

USMC: What about OBAMA’s OVERSEAS donations where they cannot identify the sourse…. LOL!

Full disclosure. I don’t want ANY campaign for national, state, or local office receiving foreign money. NONE of them.

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
10:20 am

The identity of the speaker has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the statement.

A real man will stand behind his words. So much for that “putative Republican position”.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
10:20 am

USMC — “What about OBAMA’s OVERSEAS donations where they cannot identify the sourse…. LOL!”

I’m opposed to those, too.

I’ve said more than once that I think that ONLY American citizens of voting age should be able to make political donations, and that there should be HARD CAPS on donations of both hard and soft money per election cycle (say, $2,500 hard money and $2,500 soft money in each 2-year cycle).

If you’re a foreigner, a business or a space alien, your money should never find its way into our political system IMO.

Gordon

June 27th, 2012
10:20 am

Agree with Jay on this one. No limits, full disclosure.

Truth-O-Meter

June 27th, 2012
10:21 am

Never thought I would see the day when other nations would have to intervene to help average citizens get basic rights: To health care and to vote.

Who will come to watch our polls in November to keep Republicans from stealing yet another election. The GOP leader in PA said that voter ID laws passed in that state will ensure that MItt Romney gets elected. And all the time they told everyone it was to keep down voter fraud.

Iraq, Egypt, somebody___we helped you get a democracy, now come help us keep ours

I fear that if Republicans think people will lie down and watch another election stolen by their scheming, they had better set the rewind button; we have seen this movie before.

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:22 am

Good morning, Joe @ 10:17. I would have thought that my notes on immigration would show that, unlike the leftists on this blog, I do not follow party line. But then, I write only for those who care about logic.

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:23 am

Dear Brosephus @ 10:20, assume your words mean you oppose secret ballots?

gm

June 27th, 2012
10:24 am

Help me understand this, Gordon Gekko(Willard) sent Americans jobs overseas and stands in front of conservatives who have lost jobs and tell them he is going bring back American jobs, yet he tell these idiots on the right he believe in America, yet he sent your job overseas.
I am sure past generations of rep are turning over in their grave and can not believe the retards on the right but when you follow 3 times college drop out Sean Hannity and high school drop out ex top 20 DJ, Rush the scum anything is possible.

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
10:24 am

Another think I can’t figure out: why do those who cannot make even a lame attempt to justify their party’s policies continue to adhere to strongly to them?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTHviJ8eO4Y

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
10:26 am

Dear Brosephus @ 10:20, assume your words mean you oppose secret ballots?

You assume wrong. Secret ballots have nothing to do with exercising free speech in campaigns. Ballots have always been done in secret, even for union organization purposes.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
10:26 am

R. Danneskjold — “Good morning, Joe @ 10:17. I would have thought that my notes on immigration would show that, unlike the leftists on this blog, I do not follow party line. But then, I write only for those who care about logic.”

I ceased to believe that there was any logic whatsoever behind your position when you admitted that you supported the Schiavo Act in Congress. For someone who represents himself as an avowed Libertarian, you have clearly admitted that you have no qualms with using the most coercive forms of state power to force others to behave in accordance with your wishes.

In that one thread, my opinion of you switched from ‘misinformed but polite libertarian’ to ‘dangerous, unhinged wingnut.’

You can dispense with the talk about logic, because you clearly don’t employ any.

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:27 am

I will sound a contrary note – foreign money in campaigns. One of the tropes the conservatives use against Obama is that he received “billions” of dollars from Islamist donors in 2008. Without debating the truth of the allegation, my response is, “so what?” Those dollars expended by Obama did not make any statement he made any truer, and did not make any statement made by McCain any falser. I think there are some weak minds so affected by advertising, mostly the least educated voters of our populace, but they are also the ones least likely to vote anyway.

Here we go!

June 27th, 2012
10:28 am

I agree with the Montana Gov. – “I will beleive corporations are people when they die on the battlefield defendong our country.” Until such time,corporations have no right to buy our government in plain sight or secretly. Plain and simple.

larry

June 27th, 2012
10:29 am

Who will come to watch our polls in November to keep Republicans from stealing yet another election. The GOP leader in PA said that voter ID laws passed in that state will ensure that MItt Romney gets elected. And all the time they told everyone it was to keep down voter fraud.

I pretty much figured that out. Its all part of the Republican game plan.

Voter ID laws to knock people off of voter rolls that aren’t likely to vote Republican.
Undisclosed donors giving huge sums of money hiding behind Citizens United
Destroy the only groups that are capable to give huge sums of money to the Democratic party,
the unions. Private industry bashed the unions years ago and now they are after public unions.
And finally, since there are no unions to speak for the middle and working class, they sink into poverty . Its been going on for the last 32 years. Their game plan is almost complete.

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:30 am

Dear Joe @ 10:26, post acknowledged. Just because you believe in the “culture of death” does not require a thinking mind to think similarly. I have never said the government has no purpose in this world, and “protection of the weak from intentional killing by their “protectors” due to the inconvenience of their being” strikes me as a valid purpose for government.

Erwin's cat

June 27th, 2012
10:31 am

Adam – You have a strange view on what qualifies as “agreed”

I don’t take much at face value when it concerns politics and politicians

Paul

June 27th, 2012
10:32 am

Congrats, Brosephus

You’ve managed to insult sheep and Poles!

Joseph

June 27th, 2012
10:32 am

Boo freaking hoo!!!! If you libs can’t get out and raise money that’s just to bad. Obviously big and small business’s don’t like the policy’s set forth by Oblama and the demoncrats so they want Conservatives who are more business friendly for job creators to be in power.

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
10:34 am

JamVet

June 27th, 2012
10:34 am

The worst governement that dirty money can buy.

And the corporatist fake conservatives in the GOP absolutely love it.

Look no furhter than the disgraceful Mr. McConnell, himself.

The man is not worthy of running a local PTA, much less have a position of power in the unethical, inept Lily White Party…

Brosephus™

June 27th, 2012
10:35 am

Adam @ 10:17

Ideal: All public, no private. All from taxes. Flat same amount given to any candidate from any party in a particular race.

I’m with you 100% on that.

A dad

June 27th, 2012
10:36 am

Given the blind antics of liberal groups like Act Up, OWS, MoveOn, etc., is it any wonder why a large donor might wish for some priavacy. Those groups aren’t know for their rational thought and all. But hey, certain folk want to protect abortion clinics from picketing, etc. Can’t have it both ways folks, Either open season or we will continue to whittle away at rational thoght in this country.
Also, comparing a large donor with someone who puts up a re-election sign in their front yard or a bumper sticker on their car in terms of harassment? C’mon Jay. that’s about the dumbest comparions I’ve seen you make.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

June 27th, 2012
10:36 am

The GOP wants Buffett or Soros to proclaim their donations publicly though.

I wish I had a dime for every wingnut that falsely claimed Soros was secretly funding someone.

larry

June 27th, 2012
10:36 am

Funny , though, the Republicans dont want to do anything about absentee voting . You are likely to have fraud by the absentee ballad than in the voting booth.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 27th, 2012
10:37 am

R. Danneskjold — “Dear Joe @ 10:26, post acknowledged. Just because you believe in the “culture of death”

Blah, blah, blah, vapid sloganeering, blah blah.

“does not require a thinking mind to think similarly.”

At this point, I no longer believe that you actually think.

“I have never said the government has no purpose in this world”

You have repeatedly represented yourself as a Libertarian. It’s quite clear now that you’re only a Libertarian of convenience, and that you’re a dyed-in-the-wool Statist when it serves your personal beliefs and purposes.

“and “protection of the weak from intentional killing by their “protectors” due to the inconvenience of their being” strikes me as a valid purpose for government.”

I don’t doubt that you sincerely believe that, but your personal beliefs are insufficient reason for state power to be used to compel others to behave in accordance with them. Furthermore, there’s no explicit or implicit grant of that sort of power to government in the Constitution.

(laughing) Who’d believe it — Ragnar making up a governmental power out of whole cloth and asserting that it’s a “valid purpose for government?” :D

ragnar danneskjold

June 27th, 2012
10:37 am

Dear Brosephus @ 10:26, to follow your argument then, you would require personal identification of any advocacy up to the point of the casting of a ballot, then and only then excusing public identification?

I think some of our disagreement on this issue arises from our differing perceptions of truth. For leftists, the identity of the speaker is more important than the consistency of the argument – my definition of cultism. That is why leftists reject, without any consideration, logical arguments forwarded by Chairman Ann or Dr. Sowell or Dr. Walter E Williams. The “citation to authority” guides the opinions of leftists.

The conservative view is different – any “nobody” can advance an argument among conservatives, and see that view widely accepted. That is why conservative talk radio and the conservative blogosphere have so many more “stars” than the leftist side.

JamVet

June 27th, 2012
10:37 am

To dad’s point, why are most of the men in the 1% such cowards?