Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Thursday, March 11, 2010

Mother Jones: The Supreme Court recently freed corporations to spend more money on aggressive election ads. But if businesses take advantage of this new freedom, the public probably won't know it, because it's easy for them to legally hide their political spending. Under current disclosure laws for federal elections, it's virtually impossible for the public to track how much a business spends, what it's spending on, or who ultimately benefits. Experts say the transparency problem extends to state and local races as well.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

dethspud

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

FTA: "There is no good way to gauge" how much any given company spends on elections, said Karl Sandstrom, a former vice chairman of the Federal Election Commission and counsel to the Center for Political Accountability. "There's no central collection of the information, no monitoring."

As the people lose privacy the corporations gain secrecy and even more political power than ever.

Do Not Want.

Be Well.

/That's it fer now fer the Tater o' Doom, folks.
//Exiting the Retort as ya do
stage left.

Tides Foundation is one of the biggest culprits:

"Charitable Money Laundering For Democrats: The Tides Foundation"

www.americanthinker.com

Where are all the crusaders for "transparency"?

government by and for the corporation.

All bought.

ALL OF THEM!!!!

To bad most the only thing about the candidates are the adds. Even the so called "news" is a corporation that can spend an indefinite amount of money.

From Mother Jones?

Dude, pass the hash pipe!

"Dude, pass the hash pipe!"

Haven't seen this variation before on the Drudge cliche, "put down the bong". At least it's mildly original.

Dude, pass the hash pipe!

#6 | Posted by Docsmooth

fffffft..."ear" man!

I pledge allegiance to the Corporation,
And to the United Corporations of America,
And to the Almighty Dollar for which it stands,
One Corporation, Under a Christian God,
Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all (except for gay people).

The scenario given by mother jones, has always been the same.
They make it out as if trade groups, lobbying outfits and 501c nonprofits are all new thanks to the USSC ruling.

Pew is one of the biggest 501C money funders, and hides it well!

Businesses will just split their money between several PACs they secretly own.

How many "Foundation for..." and "Institute of..." do we hear about come election time?

Corporate money affecting elections does not equal free speech it equals legalized bribery and corruption.

Until corporate monies are disallowed from affecting the electoral process there can be no real change.

Be Well.

/obligatory.

Be Well.

/obligatory.

Sadly true in 1991 when Matt Groenig wrote the strip, and true today

So corporations have an even playing field with left kook groups like ACORN et al.

So corporations have an even playing field with left kook groups like ACORN et al.

#15 | POSTED BY DIABLO

Yes EINSTEIN. Except corporations can draw on their BILLIONS in profits they make (by shipping jobs overseas and polluting the planet), whereas social equality promoting groups like acorn, have to rely on their shoestring budgets.

If you can't tell who will have more influence, you're missing some vital parts of your brain.

But OOOO acorn is scaaarrryy because the corporate mouthpieces you worship tell you so, right?

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable