Abolish the FEC

Political discussions
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69138
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by kalm »

A good piece on exposing the donors. I would be nice if more of this occurs. :nod:
Savvier donors will resist the temptation to make public fools of themselves. In which case, the press should to go to them. Reporters should do whatever it takes, consistent with journalistic ethics and the law, to find out which donors met which candidates, and who said what to whom. After all, the creation of a secret political discourse, in which rich people pay money to hear candidates say things they won’t say in public, is profoundly undemocratic.

The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman provided a great example of what such reporting can achieve when she broke the news last month that two gay hoteliers, Matt Weiderpass and Ian Reisner, had held an event for Ted Cruz, apparently because they share his hawkish views on Israel. By making the event public, Haberman made Cruz—who had been going around evangelical Iowa denouncing gay marriage—look like a hypocrite. And she made Weiderpass and Reisner—whose hotels were quickly boycotted by gay groups—look like traitors to their community. By making a private event public, in other words, Haberman threw sand in the Super PAC Machine.


Mega-donors should face a version of the same tradeoff politicians face. Presidential candidates know that in exchange for pursuing immense political power, they must forfeit much of their privacy. Mega-donors, who are also seeking immense political power via their donations, should have to make the same trade. Journalists should not only investigate their interactions with politicians, they should ferret out information about what they believe and how they conduct their affairs.

Last month, The New York Times offered a model for how to do that when Eric Lichtblau and Alexandra Stevenson reported that a hedge fund tycoon named Robert Mercer had donated millions, if not tens of millions, to super PACs associated with Cruz. Lichtblau and Stevenson went on to note that the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has accused Mercer’s hedge fund of cheating the government out of $6 billion in taxes. (Both Mercer and Cruz want to abolish the IRS). They also reported that workers in Mercer’s home had sued him for not paying them overtime, and that Mercer had himself sued a toy manufacturer for allegedly overcharging him $2 million when it constructed a model railroad in his house. Will these unflattering nuggets embarrass Mercer into abandoning super PACs? I don’t know. But if such reporting became the norm, it would scare away some donors. And American democracy would be better for it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... rs/392738/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 25486
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Abolish the FEC

Post by CID1990 »

kalm wrote:A good piece on exposing the donors. I would be nice if more of this occurs. :nod:
Savvier donors will resist the temptation to make public fools of themselves. In which case, the press should to go to them. Reporters should do whatever it takes, consistent with journalistic ethics and the law, to find out which donors met which candidates, and who said what to whom. After all, the creation of a secret political discourse, in which rich people pay money to hear candidates say things they won’t say in public, is profoundly undemocratic.

The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman provided a great example of what such reporting can achieve when she broke the news last month that two gay hoteliers, Matt Weiderpass and Ian Reisner, had held an event for Ted Cruz, apparently because they share his hawkish views on Israel. By making the event public, Haberman made Cruz—who had been going around evangelical Iowa denouncing gay marriage—look like a hypocrite. And she made Weiderpass and Reisner—whose hotels were quickly boycotted by gay groups—look like traitors to their community. By making a private event public, in other words, Haberman threw sand in the Super PAC Machine.


Mega-donors should face a version of the same tradeoff politicians face. Presidential candidates know that in exchange for pursuing immense political power, they must forfeit much of their privacy. Mega-donors, who are also seeking immense political power via their donations, should have to make the same trade. Journalists should not only investigate their interactions with politicians, they should ferret out information about what they believe and how they conduct their affairs.

Last month, The New York Times offered a model for how to do that when Eric Lichtblau and Alexandra Stevenson reported that a hedge fund tycoon named Robert Mercer had donated millions, if not tens of millions, to super PACs associated with Cruz. Lichtblau and Stevenson went on to note that the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has accused Mercer’s hedge fund of cheating the government out of $6 billion in taxes. (Both Mercer and Cruz want to abolish the IRS). They also reported that workers in Mercer’s home had sued him for not paying them overtime, and that Mercer had himself sued a toy manufacturer for allegedly overcharging him $2 million when it constructed a model railroad in his house. Will these unflattering nuggets embarrass Mercer into abandoning super PACs? I don’t know. But if such reporting became the norm, it would scare away some donors. And American democracy would be better for it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... rs/392738/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
thats a well written article about how donors to right wing politicians should be exposed

Atlantic doesnt havt shit to say about the Clinton pay to play operation because they dont was to be shut out
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69138
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by kalm »

CID1990 wrote:
kalm wrote:A good piece on exposing the donors. I would be nice if more of this occurs. :nod:



http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... rs/392738/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
thats a well written article about how donors to right wing politicians should be exposed

Atlantic doesnt havt shit to say about the Clinton pay to play operation because they dont was to be shut out
Except the entire first paragraph was about Clinton directly courting super pac donors. :lol:

If you're referring to lack of names, I agree. They should be exposed too.
Image
Image
Image
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9921
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by Baldy »

CID1990 wrote:
kalm wrote:A good piece on exposing the donors. I would be nice if more of this occurs. :nod:



http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... rs/392738/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
thats a well written article about how donors to right wing politicians should be exposed

Atlantic doesnt havt shit to say about the Clinton pay to play operation because they dont was to be shut out
Now CID...they did throw in a passing mention of The Shrilldabeast, and they even threw Obama's name in there once or so...you know to be "fair" and all. I'm sure the "journalist" was up against a deadline or something. I have no doubt they will call out all the Clinton donors by name and by scandal in the next article. :tothehand:
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69138
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by kalm »

Baldy wrote:
CID1990 wrote:
thats a well written article about how donors to right wing politicians should be exposed

Atlantic doesnt havt shit to say about the Clinton pay to play operation because they dont was to be shut out
Now CID...they did throw in a passing mention of The Shrilldabeast, and they even threw Obama's name in there once or so...you know to be "fair" and all. I'm sure the "journalist" was up against a deadline or something. I have no doubt they will call out all the Clinton donors by name and by scandal in the next article. :tothehand:
Point me to conservative writer who is decrying the corruption.
Image
Image
Image
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9921
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by Baldy »

kalm wrote:
Baldy wrote: Now CID...they did throw in a passing mention of The Shrilldabeast, and they even threw Obama's name in there once or so...you know to be "fair" and all. I'm sure the "journalist" was up against a deadline or something. I have no doubt they will call out all the Clinton donors by name and by scandal in the next article. :tothehand:
Point me to conservative writer who is decrying the corruption.
Maybe they should, but Conk writers don't have their panties in a wad over it.

Nice to see the Donks are holding truth to power, though. :coffee:
Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 26827
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Republic of Western Sussex

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by Ivytalk »

Peter Beinart? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Reliable Donk talking-point spouter. :coffee:
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69138
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by kalm »

Ivytalk wrote:Peter Beinart? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Reliable Donk talking-point spouter. :coffee:
Who isnt? What do you find disagreeable?

Now...back to your lack of substance/ kill the messenger fluffery
Image
Image
Image
Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 26827
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Republic of Western Sussex

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by Ivytalk »

kalm wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:Peter Beinart? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Reliable Donk talking-point spouter. :coffee:
Who isnt? What do you find disagreeable?

Now...back to your lack of substance/ kill the messenger fluffery
No, back to your Mother's Day tomfoolery and trollery. Admit it, klam: you don't care a fig for the exchange of ideas. You just want to make conservatives look bad. :roll:
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
Baldy
Level4
Level4
Posts: 9921
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:38 pm
I am a fan of: Georgia Southern

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by Baldy »

Ivytalk wrote:
kalm wrote:
Who isnt? What do you find disagreeable?

Now...back to your lack of substance/ kill the messenger fluffery
No, back to your Mother's Day tomfoolery and trollery. Admit it, klam: you don't care a fig for the exchange of ideas. You just want to make conservatives look bad. :roll:
He's not doing a very good job of it either. :lol:
Last edited by Baldy on Sun May 10, 2015 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69138
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by kalm »

Ivytalk wrote:
kalm wrote:
Who isnt? What do you find disagreeable?

Now...back to your lack of substance/ kill the messenger fluffery
No, back to your Mother's Day tomfoolery and trollery. Admit it, klam: you don't care a fig for the exchange of ideas. You just want to make conservatives look bad. :roll:
Campaign finance is the most important issue of our time...regardless of ideology. I've already posted several times regarding Hilary's ties to monied interests. Again, point me in the direction of a conservative who speaks to that topic... :coffee:
Image
Image
Image
Ivytalk
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 26827
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
I am a fan of: Salisbury University
Location: Republic of Western Sussex

Re: Abolish the FEC

Post by Ivytalk »

kalm wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:
No, back to your Mother's Day tomfoolery and trollery. Admit it, klam: you don't care a fig for the exchange of ideas. You just want to make conservatives look bad. :roll:
Campaign finance is the most important issue of our time...regardless of ideology. I've already posted several times regarding Hilary's ties to monied interests. Again, point me in the direction of a conservative who speaks to that topic... :coffee:
Carly Fiorina. Ramesh Ponnuru. Peter Wehner. There's three, douchebag. :coffee:
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
Post Reply