the Emergence of a Political Process That Allows Right-Wing Billionaires the Power to Turn off Govt.

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/we-are-witnessing-birth-political-process-allows-right-wing-billionaires-power-turn-govt-switch

That is what we’re watching now, what might be called the Koch Brothers’ “Samson Option,” pulling down the temple to destroy their enemies even if doing so is also destructive to them and their fortunes.

Charles and David Koch and other right-wing billionaires and near-billionaires are blind with anger after wasting millions of dollars on Mitt Romney, Karl Rove and the Republican Party in a failed attempt to defeat Barack Obama, the Democrats and health-care reform. These were the guys who smirked knowingly when Romney sneered at “the 47 percent” of Americans who receive some government help; they got snappish when Obama called them “fat cats”; they demanded the honorific title of “job creators.”

Then, they had to sit in their plush party rooms waiting to celebrate Romney’s victory only to be frustrated by a coalition of voters led by African-Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans and young urban whites who are comfortable in a more diverse country.

Despite all the money and electoral tricks, the Koch Brothers and friends failed to block the reelection of the first African-American president; they watched the Democrats defy the odds and retain the Senate; and they barely managed to hold onto a slender Republican House “majority” through aggressive gerrymandering and other anti-democratic anomalies that overcame the GOP’s loss in the popular vote of about 1½ million ballots.

[randome]

1. I'm all for reining in the power of billionaires...

...but obviously they do NOT have the power to turn off government. None of this debacle has proceeded in a coherent way and most likely will result in a vote today to re-open the government and raise the debt ceiling.

I get tired of those who want to think we are all puppets dancing to someone else's whims.

We aren't.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[Zorra]

5. Your concerns are noted. nt

[Swede Atlanta]

2. This did not occur as a result of Citizen's United alone......

this process of monied interests writing policy and controlling our elected officials (Congress and the White House) is nothing new. It has intensified with the emergence of an entrenched K street lobbying enterprise. The nail in the coffin of our representative democracy was Citizen's United.

The Democrats were able to push back the tide in 2012, re-elect Obama and maintain the Senate. But that amount of money does and will affect the outcome of elections in the future in very profound ways.

The Court has decided to take up the case of a wealthy man who is challenging the maximum donation cap by an individual to an individual campaign. Quite honestly if we are going to allow unlimited amount of anonymous money flow into the Super PACs, etc. then why should there be a limit on an individual.

The root of the problem is that America worships MONEY. While there are definitely good God-loving Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. in this country, the primary object of our love, worship and adoration is money and material things (exactly what Jesus preached against).

If MONEY is what it is all about in terms of your ability to have prestige, buying power, etc. then how does this apply to the political system?

Only if "money" is a form of free speech can money be used to buy elections. The Supreme Court has ruled that money is a form of free speech. I believe the Founders would sit in disbelief at this perversion of what they meant. It is no longer about who can express the best ideas and debate on the basis of fact and logic to influence politics. It is about who can bankroll the most negative ads, hire the most campaign staffers, etc.

The other side of this is the Court's perversion of what "individual" means. The Founders would be similarly dismayed that the Court has ruled corporations or business entities are "people" too with the same rights under the Constitution as living individual human beings. It isn't that business associations didn't exist at the time of the American Revolution and ensuing period during which the Constitution evolved after the Articles of Confederation failed. They did. But there is nothing I have ever seen in any notes, speeches, etc. from any of the founders that suggest they intended rights reserved for individuals be reserved and extended also to "associations".

Combined when a corporation or association of individuals organized around a common objective are "people" and have the same rights as individuals and money is free speech, the only thing preventing a monied takeover of our system is campaign finance legislation.

The Court has eviscerated what we had and I expect by next June will completely destroy what is left.

[jsr]

4. +1

[gopiscrap]

3. Exactly