Citizens United By-Product?

We need to start making things again in this country, and we can do that by reducing the tax and regulatory burdens on job creators. America will have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Think about that. Look no further to see why jobs are moving overseas.Michelle Bachmann Response

I cannot remember ever having three State of the Union speeches in one year. Normally the party in the White House gives the traditional State of the Union speech followed by the out of office party giving a response. Now thanks to our political system being awash in cash any crank can go on television and get their 15 minutes of fame. My question is who funded this little Bachmann escapade? Michelle Bachmann is supposed to be a money maker and according to reports she is a fund-raising machine, but where does this money come from? No one knows. I would venture to guess that it is the same AstroTurf funders who started the teabagger movement.

I have a hard time believing that it would be difficult to raise money with a platform of tax-cuts for the wealthy, removing regulations on businesses, and repealing health-care reform. I think there are a number of wealthy folks who would contribute to those causes, so the fact that she raises money should not be falsely correlated to her popularity. Cranks like Bachmann will always appeal to 15-20% of the population and while this sells a lot of gold and dog food it doesn’t translate well in national elections. Michelle Bachmann and her ilk are the pit-bulls of the right to make sure any compromise will be their compromise which is no compromise at all. Moving forward the new hostages won’t just be the unemployed, the poor, and the middle-class it will be the full faith and credit of the United States.

The new target will be the infamous entitlements. The line will be that you can’t be serious about deficits if you don’t cut entitlements. This of course will come from the same folks who want to make the Bush tax-cuts for the wealthy permanent. What I fail to understand is that we are having this one sided conversation about cutting the deficit without the other side of the equation which is to increase revenues. The way that Bill Clinton created a surplus was not by cutting Social Security and our safety net; he did it by raising revenues. And guess what the sky didn’t fall and the wealthy and the corporations did not move to Eastern Europe where the rates are much lower. The idea that you are going to cut your way out of this debt is ludicrous.

Is it just me or is it coincidental that following the Citizens United decision we are now being provided with every extremist view on full display. My concern is that we will be bombarded by these fanatical views not because those who espouse them are credible or even electable. The strategy will be to push the center further and further to their extreme view so that views that were once unthinkable are now being debated as mainstream. How many formerly extreme views are now a part of our political discussions? Anyone remember the 14th Amendment and how now it is open for public debate and re-litigation against Latinos? It wasn’t that long ago that this would have been considered an extreme remedy for the immigration crisis. Or how about referring to the unemployed and seniors as lazy and stopping benefits in the middle of an economic downturn like we haven’t seen since the Great Depression? Even the most ardent critics would not have proposed cutting off unemployment benefits in the midst of the "Great Recession".

The upcoming Presidential election is going to be full of cranks and fanatics and their goal will be to distract and confuse the electorate. They will be able to do so with the help of the Citizens United decision and the 501(c)4 organizations flush with cash that it spawned. These unnamed donors will be able to manipulate the issues and steer the debate away from the real issues and towards the dark hordes that are storming our borders or the socialist liberals who have the audacity to ask them to pay their fair share of taxes. Thanks to 24/7 cable news and the Supreme Court the airwaves will be flooded with the likes of Palin, Bachmann, and O’Donnell. The teabagger Barbie’s will be on full display and in rare form providing not only verbal, but visual distractions for the punditry.

We now have Supreme Court Justices hiding income from their spouses and conducting behind the scenes political talks for congressional audiences. My question is what job did Ms. Thomas perform to make $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation? Whether there is criminal intent or conflict of interest is not the issue. The issue is that under this Court more controversial decisions have been made and it doesn’t appear those decisions were based in Constitutional law, but instead on a political agenda. It is odd to me that the citizen’s of this country are overwhelmingly opposed to the Citizens United decision and yet our judiciary blatantly and apologetically displays their partisanship in a way that would have been unheard of just a few years ago.

It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first. - Ronald Reagan

The Disputed Truth

Tags: Michelle Bachmann, Citizens United, Bill Clinton, Sarah Palin, Christine O’Donnell, Ronald Reagan, teabaggers (all tags)

Comments

3 Comments

hello

what does this even mean? are u guys against ilegals or what? what did they do to you, the admendment 14th already states ... childrens of illegals have the right of birth right citizenship. now fuck off and leve them alone, what did those kids do to you anyway? leve them alone. I bet your grandparents were imigrants too... and the usa is mixed with manny diffrent races, thats my opinion.

by Guadalupe Parra 2011-01-31 01:04AM | 0 recs
RE: hello

I am against using the 14th amendment against latinos!

by Forgiven 2011-02-01 11:50AM | 0 recs
Citizens United is a very important decision

Corporations are not human beings - they do not have inalienable rights and a certain self integrity.

We benefit from hundreds of years of good citizens and statesmen battling against tyranny - when we invoke our rights as citizens. The amendments to our constitution, particularly the first few - stand as a testament to human rights and positive governance.

Case in point: look at Egypt.  The power-mad and corrupt have never fully taken over our country as they have in Egypt (and they will soon discover that all major cities really only have a cached supply of two weeks, of food).  The riots continue. But here, we are at least capable of discourse.

And how? Well. I speak for myself.  And I voice my idea. I call my representative or senator. He records that one vote.

What if I wasn't me - a human being - and instead, I was a corporation?  Well. The only model I can give is that of being a king.  I would have the power of all of those working beneath me, at my beck and call. My words written here in this post would have been vetted and crafted carefully by a team. My call to my representative or senator would not be just one call - but calls made by an assembled team, and quite possibly also a lobbyist who will show up at the door with cash in hand to influence and prostitute that politician.  And they masquerade. They buy out radio personalities - make fake call-in radio shows (where the only callers that get on, are the ones they screen to say what they want).  They manipulate media by using the power of the advertiser - editors commonly check with large advertisers and verify if a story that will be run opposite their purchased page is agreeable to them.

So. We fought to have equal representation. But treating corporations as in the manner of Citizens united - creates a new kingdom in which we are serfs and the American Corporation is a barony with priviledged and exclusive hidden access to the republic.

If you listen carefully you can hear the sound of democracy burning and a new form of socialism taking hold. Republicans, who are all generally on the take from corporations - tend to ignore the fact that corporations are centrally planned economies, with no voter representation. Under the guidance of a committee of dictators.

Aka. Socialist entities pursuing socialist goals. "Reducing taxes" is hardly their main aim : they will back any legislation that benefits them and removes our right to have a voice that speaks as equal to others. They want to be more equal. Better. They don't believe in democracy. They believe in profit. 

The author of this post gets it right.

by Trey Rentz 2011-02-01 12:32PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads