Hullabaloo

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

 
In case there was any doubt which party is the party of plutocracy

by David Atkins

Some people want a secret plutocracy. Some people don't:

The Senate has failed to advance legislation that would require independent groups to disclose the names of contributors who give more than $10,000 for use in political campaigns.

The measure, known as the DISCLOSE Act, died in a 51 to 44 vote on a procedural motion. It needed 60 votes to move forward.

Its failure was widely expected, but Democrats pushed for the vote, believing that Republicans will be politically damaged by their opposition to bringing new transparency to campaigns. The vote could also serve to energize the Democratic base, which has been exercised over the role they believe secret corporate donations are playing in the campaign.

To press the point, bill sponsor Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), will lead Senate Democrats in a “midnight vigil” Monday night, with floor speeches scheduled into the early morning. The goal is to hammer Republicans for blocking the bill and push for another vote on the measure Tuesday.

“We are determined to prove that transparency is not a radical concept,” said Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.). “Our bill is as simple and straightforward as it gets – if you are making large donations to influence an election, the voters in that election should know who you are.”

Republicans say the measure could have a chilling affect on political giving, subjecting campaign donors to intimidation from their political opponents.

It's easy to declare a pox on both houses and say that voting doesn't matter and both parties are equally corrupt. It's harder when the evidence to the contrary is so obvious.

As long as these people are willing to spend billions of dollars stealing elections and can get away with doing so under cover of total darkness, they don't really care how many people march in the streets. The little people mean nothing to them. And even if worst comes to worst, it still won't matter to them. After all, it's not as if the villains will be anywhere in the remote vicinity of the revolution even if it were to ever come, which it won't. They'll already be safely in the arms of Dubai, Nassau, or any other welcoming city whose country has low taxes and little will to extradite. Armed revolutions usually accomplish little except the slaughter of the innocent.

The alternative, of course, is to vote and fight like hell within the confines of the democratic system. Even if the choices aren't necessarily between good and evil, non-participation in the process is inexcusable when it's so abundantly clear which side is the far greater evil.


.
thereisnospoon 7/17/2012 07:30:00 AM