As I have written about in other blog posts, the scent of money to elect a president in the United States continues to be amaze and confound me. When I read about, see, listen, etc, to all the blah, blah, blah about poverty, entitlements, military budget cuts, etc, etc, and then realize that the billions as in BILLIONS of dollars fire hosed into campaigns to elect a person to a job paying less than a midsized company vice president is paid; it just begins to turn in my stomach. With so many places to place available monies to enhance society and to spur innovation via capital but then to see the unbelievable amounts of money that is now mandated to be elected to national office is simply unswallowable to me for I cannot understand how this culture has so evolved to this prostitutional level of electability.
When I see and hear of the candidates fund raising getting more camera lights and ink than on the principles and positions, I simply want to cringe. It lets me know that there are too many people with too much money to blow away and like inflation, too many dollars chasing too few goods, it only dilutes the value of the process and the candidate. I hope you can see the parallel I am making to monetary inflation and electability of a presidential candidate; something is simply wrong about that and I cannot begin to imagine the Framers could have conceived of this when the Constitution was built; I certainly hope they couldn't.
Please know that I am not a prude nor am I a cynic by nature! But as I watch the billions spent on TV ads burning up the air ways with misquotes, insinuation, outright frontal attacks on character and realize where those billions have been redirected from really needed funding to the presidential campaigns of the elites or those wanting to be in the elites and yes, it does come to that. I hope some politician reads this and rebuts my assertion that this is just wrong and wrong for our nation. Give me a president of principle, no buses, no teleprompters, no national anthem singers, no SuperPac recipients; somebody that will tell me what this nation needs when it is broken, how they will build the plan to right the listing vessels and let's move on.
I want a leader I can believe and trust and not a leader beholden to special interests, PACS, unions but a leader for WE THE PEOPLE! I really hope I have managed to offend someone with this writing. I am pasting in a short WSJ article of today that only sprinkled salt in this bleeding ulcer of a system that, like the tax laws, need to be thrown in the Atlantic and built from the ground up with moral fiber, conviction and Godly principles.
The Super PAC President
Obama makes fools of the goo-goos one more time.
Get out your checkbook, George Soros. You too, Peter Lewis and Steve Bing. An Obama for President fund-raiser will soon be calling to hit you up for some big campaign money. May we suggest $5 million?
That's the meaning of the White House decision, announced late Monday night, to encourage donations to a struggling Super PAC trying to raise money to attack President Obama's Republican opponent this year. This would be the same kind of political action committee that Mr. Obama and other good liberals have been denouncing for months as an avenue for corruption and a blight on America's national honor.
It's easy to denounce this switcheroo, and no doubt many liberals will do so—for all of 24 hours. This synthetic outrage will be highly entertaining. But then they will return to deploring Republicans and privately encouraging "millionaires and billionaires" like Mr. Soros and Jeffrey Katzenberg to save the Democratic Party in November. It may create a little "psychic dissonance" to denounce big money and then beg for it, as one Soros acolyte was quoted Tuesday as saying. But you gotta do what you gotta do.
The better way to understand this decision is that it is Mr. Obama's second in-kind contribution to the demise of the campaign-finance reform movement. In 2008, Mr. Obama was so flush with cash he voluntarily dropped out of the presidential public-funding system that limits the amount a candidate can raise and spend. John McCain, trapped by his own history of favoring spending limits, played the sap, obeyed the rules, and was heavily outspent. You may have noticed he lost.
The liberal goo-goos want to ban money from politics, but now their political hero has made them look like fools—twice.
Mitt Romney and any other potential GOP nominee won't be fooled again. Mr. Romney's Super PAC has already raised in the neighborhood of $30 million and has shown it is willing to use it to carve up an opponent.
Mr. Obama's Super PAC has had a harder time raising funds this cycle. So the President is now anointing certain Administration officials to be able to speak directly on its behalf—though apparently not actively to solicit checks.
So let's see: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
No wonder Americans are cynical about politics.
It's easy to denounce this switcheroo, and no doubt many liberals will do so—for all of 24 hours. This synthetic outrage will be highly entertaining. But then they will return to deploring Republicans and privately encouraging "millionaires and billionaires" like Mr. Soros and Jeffrey Katzenberg to save the Democratic Party in November. It may create a little "psychic dissonance" to denounce big money and then beg for it, as one Soros acolyte was quoted Tuesday as saying. But you gotta do what you gotta do.
Related Video
Best of the Web columnist James Taranto on President Obama's embrace of Super PACs and the primary races today.
The liberal goo-goos want to ban money from politics, but now their political hero has made them look like fools—twice.
Mitt Romney and any other potential GOP nominee won't be fooled again. Mr. Romney's Super PAC has already raised in the neighborhood of $30 million and has shown it is willing to use it to carve up an opponent.
Mr. Obama's Super PAC has had a harder time raising funds this cycle. So the President is now anointing certain Administration officials to be able to speak directly on its behalf—though apparently not actively to solicit checks.
So let's see: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
No wonder Americans are cynical about politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment