The DISCLOSE bill (more on the name in a moment) is a bill being pushed through congress with Chairman Zero’s full support which on the face of it seeks to disclose exactly where money for certain political ads comes from. Of course this sounds very reasonable and most people (including me) would wholeheartedly support it, if that is all that it proposes to do. But that is not the whole story. There are, of course, a lot of provisions in this bill; with all the lawyers in the District of Criminals it is impossible to have a 17 page bill anymore. So some of the provisions would require non profit groups, and special interests (not unions, though, no never) to essentially disclose their membership lists (unless there are over a million members, etc.; in a nod to the NRA to keep them from opposing the bill). Oh, and it foreseeable that larger blogs might also fall into this regulation as it is written. This is all in response to the neutering of McCain-Feingold by the SCOTUS.
Jim Hightower, a bestselling author and writer for the Colorado Springs Independent wrote a piece decrying this proposed legislation because it doesn’t do enough to limit corporate donations in federal elections.
Now, I do not dispute in any way that there is a serious problem with campaign finance and the spending of OPM (Other People’s Money, pronounced O-P-UM) in general by the District of Criminals. But everyone needs to just hold up and ask themselves why Obama, and the Democrats in congress, want a stranglehold put on corporations and independent journalists to exercise their first amendment rights during elections. Aren’t the Democrats the champions of Free Speech and Expression. The keys to that question are the words “Independent” and “Union.” They are against Independent Journalists because they are “For” the Mainstream Legacy Dinosaur Media, and that is because the MSM is “For” crooked liberal politicians. Hell,
Obama didn’t need paid advertising with all the free fluff pieces done on him by starry eyed journalists getting tingles and waxing eloquent. The DemocRats are against non-profit groups (similar to the NRA) because those groups oppose them, but there are provisions exempting Unions in the legislation because Unions and Democrats are fellow travelers on the path to Socialism. Without the Unions, Democrats would have been forgotten long ago.Now back the name of the bill and the real Piece De Resistance to Hightower’s article is this:
The DISCLOSE Act (or, more fully, the "Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections" Act).Hold it…I am not sure I want “Democracy Strengthened” well, not in the sens e that it is meant by the current miscreants in DC. As I have discussed in the past it is all in the name. Democracy is rule by the people, or the mob. We are, or were, or are supposed to be, a Representative Republic, with representatives democratically elected. But to the Liberals, Democracy means something different than it does to me. Many of you may have heard the phrase “mob-rule” or “group-think.” to quote Tommy Lee Jones in MiB, “
That is a perfect summary of why unlimited democracy is a bad, bad, idea. The herd does not make well reasoned decisions, and the constitution was written to keep the easily manipulated mob from allowing its’ ever, and easy, changing emotions from tearing us apart. Hightower continues:Edwards: Why the big secret? People are smart. They can handle it.
Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow. ”
“More to the point, couldn't the Democrats have come up with a more proportional response to the Court's enthronement of corporate money over our people's democracy? The Court's decision is the nuclear bomb of politics, for it allows any and every corporate giant — from Wall Street to Wal-Mart — to pour unlimited sums of money directly from their massive treasuries into campaigns to elect or defeat anyone they choose.”
Gotta get rid of that Corporate money, you know, as opposed to the SEIU, and Government and Teachers Unions free for all along with all the free positive press the MSM can dish out? Mr. Hightower is obviously another one of the Liberal Elite who seek to see if what History has shown to fail in practice will work in Theory, meaning Socialism. More from the article:“We can't let these pusillanimous Democrats get away with this pathetic response. It is, after all, our democracy that the Court is turning into a plutocracy. “
So another Liberal who thinks Dingy Harry and Nasty Botoxi are not Far Left ENOUGH. Better a Plutocracy than a Politburo, I say… Businesses at least look out for their customers and shareholders best interests which isn’t compassionate, but is more accountable than our current government. NOT that I think a Plutocracy is a good idea.
The real crux of this whole situation is: how do you think Mr. Hightower would feel if the shoe was on the other foot? If the NRA and the TEA party had just elected their dream candidate and was seeking to restrain or eliminate unions and union money from elections? Would that also be ‘democracy in action’? Would he be screaming as loudly? I think not. Which is the exact reason we are NOT a democracy. To protect the interests of the minority. To keep from having French Revolutions .
Because true democracy, rule by the mob, has always resulted in blood in the streets.
-KOOK
