Repub swift boat ad is poison fruit of McCain/Feingold CFR tree

[Cicero]

Isn't it obvious? Instead of unaccountable millions being funneled to the political parties, we now have unaccountable millions being funneled to these 527 groups. What has changed, fundamentally? "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

Let's face it. Campaign Finance Reform is a bust, up and down the line.

And I get especially incensed when I hear people scream about how horrible it is when Richard Mellon Scaife or Rupert Murdock spend their multi-millions supporting Republicans, while at the same time bowing and kissing the feet of George Soros as he spends multi-millions supporting Democrats. If money is a corrupting influence, then money is a corrupting influence, PERIOD!

Later,

[Eric J in MN]

1. No. The group dosn't have millions. It made one tacky

ad which is getting attention.

Campaign Finance Reform is good.

[Cicero]

27. Maybe not this particular group...

...but you know as well as I do that the Repubs are going to start pouring money into 527s that support their causes. Sauce for the goose, and all that.

later,

[NewYorkerfromMass]

2. Later. eom

[Robbien]

3. The GOP/Freepers are always frantically whining about Soros

as if he is the big boogy man and no other money but his is behind Move-On. Move-On is not a grass-roots org the GOP whines.

Why are you also harping on this GOP meme?

[Cicero]

10. He's a billionaire (or nearly), so are Scaife and Murdock

Why is money from Scaife and Murdock considered to be signs of impending Apocolypse, while money from Soros is praised as manna from heaven?

Again, if money is corrupting, then it is corrupting, from wherever the source.

Why are you also harping on this GOP meme?

I am offering what I believe to be valid criticism of the selective outrage by proponents of CFR over money from multi-millionaires, and that it depends on which side is being financed. Calling it a "meme", as if it had no other substance than having the lyrics of "Don't worry, be happy" running around in your brain, is insulting and condescending. Address the issue, please.

As I've been seeing it (and yes, I'm exagerating just a wee bit to make my point)
Uber-rich support of Democrats: Jesus is just around the corner. Sunlight and love for everyone! O8)
Uber-rich support of Republicans: Satan is just around the corner. Pitchforks in the a$$ for everyone! :evilgrin:

I am looking for some consistency here.

Later,

[LoZoccolo]

18. Go get your own consistency.

Show us what Soros has done to mess things up and you might have a case. Right now, all you're saying is he's a millionaire.

[Cicero]

28. Exactly, that's my point

All the proponents of CFR I have ever heard screamed about the corrupting influence of money, that money was inherently corrupting.

Under that standard, money from Soros = money from Scaife/Murdock.

I do not believe that money is inherently corrupting.

Later,

[sendero]

21. Please explain..

.... how Soros' business interests in the US are going to be furthered by his political activities. Then we can talk.

[Cicero]

29. So the only way money can be corrupting is...

...if it is contributed in the support of business interests?

I know that bunch of right-wingers are incensed over the cultural changes that Soros supports, such as decriminalization/legalization of medical marijuana. I know they would consider money donated by Soros as being corrupting.

There are also nasty rumors that Soros is very anti-Semetic, although that could be just an exaggeration of possible anti-Isreal statements he may have made (I have not investigated). The two are not the same thing.

Later,

[Feanorcurufinwe]

4. Campaign finance reform can only be achieved by overturning

that ridiculous ruling from the Supreme Court equating money and speech, along with the other ridiculous ruling that a corporation is a person.

Anything less than that is the equivalent of putting a band-aid on a severed limb.

[denverbill]

6. Bingo.

If money = speech, then bribery should be legal because all you are doing is 'talking' to your representative with money.

[Cicero]

11. As I understand it...

...the ruling does not equate money and speech, it says that money facilitates speech, and to restrict money will have a stifling effect on the ability to engage in political speech.

However, I'm talking off the top of my head here, I do need to go back and review the case in greater detail.

As for corporations being persons under the law, I do have some problems with that. However, I do believe that corporations (and churches as well), should be able to engage in political speech as much as any other person.

Just as I believe that no group of individuals should (collectively)have more rights than 1 single person, I also believe that a group of individuals should also not have fewer rights than 1 single person. And one of those rights is... freedom of speech.

Later,

[movonne]

5. Money might corrupt but at this point we have no other choice...

the corporations and especially the oil co's are giving so much to the repubs that we have no other choice..or lose, and at the rate things are going his first 4 years, do you think that there will any Democratic party after 8 years of this.

[hughee99]

7. Frankly, I agree

Whether you put $$ in the hands of Politicians, Political parties, or 527 groups, it is all for the same purpose. Rather than a politician having to answer to big money doners to their campaign, they'll now have to answer to big money doners to "their" 527 groups, some of which were big money doners before CFR. I have yet to see the benefits from CFR, it looks like the only bonus is for the creative accountants from ENRON and other companies that can now work in politics. Essentially, "special interests" have always been able to run ads, it's just now, they can't run them 60 days before an election. This part also bothers me. Lets wait until 60 days before and see how well this one goes over too.

[Eric J in MN]

8. Money to 527s can't be from coporations or unions.

Before McCain-Feingold, corporations would make big donation to both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Now corporations can't donate to the parties or 527s.

[hughee99]

17. No, but

the owners or CEO's of those corperations can take their big bonuses and then donate whatever they want to a 527. I don't see much of a difference between ENRON donating $5 mil to an "interest group" or Ken Lay donating $5 mil to a 527.

[Cicero]

23. You really think that will stop them?

:eyes:

Later,

[Disturbed]

9. Rotten!!!

The whole thing is rotten. Campaign financing. Corporate take over of Govt. No third party chance. The lesser of two evils needs to be changed!

If McCain really had any honor he wouldn't be shillling for the Neo Fascists. He talks but doesn't walk the walk. After what they did to him that he still shills for them is repugnant. Let him actually do the honorable thing. Colon is another total, disgraced bootlicker.

[GiovanniC]

12. Hmm... Where Have I Heard This Before?

Oh yeah... Rove's blast fax.

[Cicero]

13. Sorry, don't have a fax machine

Nor do I have any ties to the Republican party. I cut them loose almost a decade ago.

Now, will there be any comments on the actual issue, or are dismissive "drive-bys" all you got?

Later,

[oneighty]

15. It is a chess game

Republicans put up an ultra-rich champion and everybody cheers. The Democrats play their even more ultra-rich champion and everybody boos.

That is what you are saying?

Hey seems like a good move to me.

180

[GiovanniC]

20. If You Want Something More Substantive

Might I suggest that grassroots organizations like MoveOn.org {DO NOT EQUAL}‚ the lying bastard swift boat group, even if both you and Scott McClellan say so.

I'm not accusing you of having ties to the right wing. I'm simply pointing out that the point that you make is exactly the same shit that McClellan was spewing yesterday. The right-wing would love nothing more than to get rid of groups like MoveOn and ACT, because groups like that have no right-wing equals.

The fact of the matter is that these idiots can lie for free, and money isn't as big of a problem as the fact that all the moron media outlets played this ad ad infinitum for free. The problem is not 527s per se. The problem is right-wing bastards coming out and lying. The problem is the media going along with it. But that would be happening whether 527s were allowed or not.

[Radical Activist]

14. Meaningful campaign finance reform will make it cheaper to run for office

As long as running for office costs a lot of money then a lot of money will be raised, one way or another, no matter what the new rules are. The best part of the campaign finance law was taken out because the corporate media doesn't want it.

We need to make TV and radio advertising cheap or free for federal campaigns. That's where at least half the money raised on a campaign goes. If you want to make holding office available to those not beholden to wealthy interests then you need to open up the airways to people who can't raise a lot of campaign cash. Having strict contribution limits only forces politicians to spend more time raising money instead of campaigning with the public or doing their job. Free advertising means that someone who can't raise a lot of money can still be heard, and they can spend their time doing real grass-roots campaigning with the general public.

Sadly, the corporate media will never let this aspect of campaign reform be discussed because it violates their business interests.

[Bandit]

16. Not sure you are aware of what you speak

It is one thing for a large Corporation to give millions to a candidate such as Enron or Halliburton. It is quite another for people to band together and buy ad space to get their message out to the public. 527 groups give no money to candidates. They put their own message out for folks to contemplate. That is called freedom of speech while giving huge amounts to a candidate is close to bribery.

[Langis]

19. What the fuck are you smoking?

You are equating Rupert Murdock, someone who owns 1200+ radio stations, and Fox News to George Soros? Yes George has given 15 million to Moveon and other liberal groups but that is a drop in the bucket compared to Murdock. Please go away.

[Cicero]

25. He's pledged to raise $75 million

If some wealthy financier back in 1996 had pledged to raise $75M for the express purpose of booting Pres. Clinton out of office, the howls of protest from the left would still be reverberating around the world to this day.

All this furor over my bringing up Soros kinda distracts from my contention, which is the "meme" (as another poster declared my statements to be) that money is an inherently corrupting influence in politics.

If that is the case, then money from George Soros is equally corrupting as money from Murdock and Scaife.

Later,

[West Coast Democrat]

22. Hmm...I heard this from a Republican spinster on TV last night......

the same argument.

[Cicero]

26. Even a stopped clock can be right twice a day

If a Republican said the sun rises in the east, would you call him a liar?

Later,

[seabeyond]

24. swift boat ad is blatantly dishonest and disgusting.....good bye

wink

[Cicero]

30. Kick

I want to try and keep this topic alive for just a little longer, if I can.

Later,