By David Truskoff 28 February, 2008
Countercurrents.org
The more one gets immersed in the political machinations of the so called two party system in America, the more one yearns for a hot shower with a strong bar of soap. It is one thing to shrug and say we all know it is a cesspool, but can we sit by and watch the destruction of the post war dream of those often referred to as the "Greatest Generation?" Their dream was of the maturing of America into a real democracy. The new crop of presidential candidates dashes all hope of that dream ever coming true. Barack Obama received over $102 million by the year 2007. The Non Partisan Center for Responsive Politics reported that he has given more than $698,200 to superdelegates from his political action committee. They also stated that superdelegates have received at least $904,200 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years. The old expression that "money Talks" lies like a blanket of sleeze over the entire process. Obama and Clinton are both money creations just like all of their predecessors since Franklin Roosevelt. In Washington you buy and you sell and democracy be damned.
Obama claims that 98% of his contributions come from individuals
$102,127,516
PAC contributions $8,840 (0.0%)
Candidate self-financing $0
Other $1,767,197 (1.7%)
The fairly new and generous contribution limits stated by the Federal Elections Commission says that
an individual may give a maximum of:
$2,300 per election to a Federal candidate or the candidate's campaign committee. Notice that the limit applies separately to each election. Primaries, runoffs and general elections are considered separate elections. $5,000 per calendar year to a PAC. This limit applies to a PAC (political action committee) that supports Federal candidates. (PACs are neither party committees nor candidate committees. Some PACs are sponsored by corporations and unions--trade, industry and labor PACs. Other PACs, often ideological, do not have a corporate or labor sponsor and are therefore called nonconnected PACs.) PACs use your contributions to make their own contributions to Federal candidates and to fund other election-related activities.
$10,000 per calendar year to a State or local party committee. A State party committee shares its limits with local party committees in that state unless a local committee's independence can be demonstrated. $28,500 per calendar year to a national party committee. This limit applies separately to a party's national committee, House campaign committee and Senate campaign committee.
$108,200 total biennial limit. This biennial limit places a ceiling on your total contributions, as explained below. $100 in currency (cash) to any political committee. (Anonymous cash contributions may not exceed $50.) Contributions exceeding $100 must be made by check, money order or other written instrument. It is called purposeful confusion. Both Clinton and Obama had to pass the litmus test of IPAC and the very powerful DLC. The DLC are a group of corporate fundraisers within the Democratic Party who have a death grip on the Party. Their main goal is to see that there is very little policy difference between the Republican and Democratic Party. They use their money and power to keep the Democrats from turning, "too liberal." Ralph Nader once wrote, "To the DLC mind, Democrats are catering to "special interests" when they stand up for trade unions, regulatory consumer-investor protections, a pre-emptive peace policy overseas, pruning the bloated military budget now devouring fully half of the federal government's entire discretionary expenditures, defending Social Security from Wall Street schemes, and pressing for universal health care coverage.
So right-wing is the DLC, mounted imperiously on their sagging Party, that even opposing Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, that cause huge federal deficits and program cuts in necessities such as health, education, environmental protection and children well-being, is considered ultra-liberal and contrary to winning campaigns." To further please the DLC, who wove Obama’s straight jacket, he released the following statement; Obama said, "the Cuban president's decision to hand power to his younger brother "should mark the end of a dark era in Cuba's history. ... Fidel Castro's stepping down is an essential first step, but it is sadly insufficient in bringing freedom to Cuba."
When the Connecticut Democratic Party chose Ned Lamont over Lieberman the DLC issued this statement. "We deplore this purge effort because Joe Lieberman is an outstanding and respected U.S. Senator. He is a man of utmost integrity who speaks and governs by his values and principles, even when they lead him against the popular tide -- as he did when he went to Mississippi to fight for civil rights in 1964. He is a man who always puts his country above his party or his personal interests. Those are qualities we should cherish, not disdain, in today's far too polarized politics. We need more, not fewer, people with Joe Lieberman's character in the Democratic Party. " I do not think that Connecticut liberals supporting Obama are even aware of his political donations to Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont, before realizing that he would not win the primary in this area unless he switched to Lamont.
(I spent some time in Mississippi and I would think that if there was a guy there "Fighting for civil rights" from my home state I would have heard about it. He might have visited there, but fighting?)
In a story by Stephanie Reitz, Associated Press Writer | March 31, 2006 …."U.S. Sen. Barack Obama rallied Connecticut Democrats at their annual dinner Thursday night, throwing his support behind mentor and Senate colleague Joe Lieberman. "I am absolutely certain Connecticut is going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the U.S. Senate so he can continue to serve on our behalf," he said. Lieberman became Obama's mentor when Obama was sworn into the Senate in 2005. They stayed close at Thursday night's event, too, entering the room together and working the crowd in tandem." A short seven months later Oct. 27, 2006 AP reported Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, a vocal defender of Sen. Joe Lieberman earlier this year, is urging Connecticut voters to rally behind his rival, Ned Lamont. "Ned Lamont has waged an impressive grass-roots campaign to give the people of Connecticut a choice in the November Senate election,"
The DLC stepped on Dennis J. Kucinich who tried to bring some honesty and truth to the process.
How dare he? Truth never wins elections. With no help from the party Kucinich was only able to raise a mere $4 million. Hardly enough to pay for TV adds in one primary state. The media took its cue from the DLC and ignored Dennis. They squeezed him out of debates and again tramping on the democratic process purged him right out of the race. He said, in response to the fox network refusal, "If you want to be the President of the United States, you can't be afraid to deal with people with whom you disagree politically. No one is further removed from Fox's political philosophy than I am, but fear should not dictate decisions that affect hundreds of millions of Americans and billions of others around the world who are starving for real leadership. I'm prepared to discuss the war, health care, trade, or any other issue anytime, anywhere, with any audience, answering any question from any media. And any candidate who won't shouldn't be President of the United States." A very believable rumor has it that before the Nevada primary, Presidential candidate Kucinich was visited by representatives of Nancy Pelosi and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee - AIPAC. They told Dennis that if he would drop his campaigns to impeach Cheney and Bush, they would guarantee his re-election to the House of Representatives. Kucinich threw them out of his office. Excuse me everyone I’m going to look for a strong bar of soap. suttonbear@att.net |