Americans hate the Federal Government more than ever

[Deranged Rhino]

US Elections 2016: "They system is rigged, the government coin-operated"

 

 

Right now there is no credible outside threat to our American way of life. No other nation is sounding the death knell of ours. But the rapid proliferation of a system akin to oligarchy – within our own country – threatens to cripple our march forward.

 

It’s a threat the founding fathers knew we would always have to guard against. In the summer of 1787, when delegates to the Constitutional Convention were in the heat of their debates, they were obsessed with bribery, influence, and corruption. James Madison, who kept meticulous notes, recorded the word “corruption” 54 times. To them, the notion of corruption was both the corruption of the individual and the corruption of the system of governance. They were less obsessed with corrupt individuals – with bad apples – than with the system itself, with the orchard. The rotting of the fruit of liberty was seen as the dominance of private interests over the public interest. It was the bending of governing priorities away from the common good – a process that would, over time, fatally damage the whole project of a democratic republic – of “We, the people”, of the “consent of the governed”.

SNIP

Obviously, money’s dominance of politics and governing isn’t the only factor behind the dysfunction of our democracy. Gerrymandered congressional districts, presidential elections entirely focused on a handful of states, low voter-turnout rates, petty and polarised political parties, superficial and partisan media, and an increasingly rude public arena all contribute to the breakdown of our ability to govern together.

But big money makes a lot of these factors worse, and it’s time for the political class – which has grown way too cosy with the status quo – to step out of its elite bubble and recognise that the crisis we are in is eating away at the country.

In 1998, the total amount of money spent on federal elections was $1.6bn. By 2012, it had nearly quadrupled to $6.2bn.

The supreme court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling was akin to crop spraying gasoline on to a wildfire. In a narrow 5-4 decision, the majority of justices asserted that corporate spending in politics is an act of free speech and should therefore be unlimited. Subsequent lower court rulings have expanded that rationale to reduce some limits on political campaign contributions, which has put the chase for political money on steroids.

 

SNIP

 

Which means that new representatives are expected to spend half of their time either dialling for dollars or attending fundraising events.

Who are they calling? Probably not you. Certainly not us. Mostly, very wealthy donors in the richest cities in America. And who’s throwing the daily fundraisers for them? Often, the very industries they are supposed to be regulating, based on their congressional committee assignments.

 

The Finance Committee members rake in contributions from the bankers and their lobbyists, the Natural Resources Committee members from the oil and coal executives and their lobbyists. That’s why these types of committees on Capitol Hill are referred to as “cash committees”. In 2014, for instance, the top industries contributing to members of the House Financial Services Committee, formerly known as the Banking Committee, were finance, insurance, and real estate. Individuals and Pacs [independent groups that collect donations] from those sectors collectively chipped $30m into the committee members’ coffers.

 

As Ray Plank, the founder and former chairman of the Apache Corporation, told the conservative journalist Peter Schweizer, whose book Extortion was later turned into a 60 Minutes episode, campaign cash and corporate contracts with well-connected lobbying firms are “protection money. It’s what you expect from the mafia.”

 

Yet, in Washington and the state capitals, such activity is not seen as mafia-like. It’s run-of-the-mill. It’s the way things get done. Anyone who questions it, or wants to change it, is deemed naive or – even worse – idealistic.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/10/nation-on-the-take-wendell-potter-nick-penniman-extract

Edited April 10, 2016 by Deranged Rhino

[Deranged Rhino]

Media Silent as Massive Protest in D.C. Fills Jails Beyond Capacity

 

With over 53,000 tweets, #DemocracySpring is trending on Twitter and on Facebook, and the protest is still unfolding. However, some noted that even with a massive outcry, mainstream media coverage was nowhere to be found.

 

http://usuncut.com/resistance/d-c-protest-democracyspring-arrests

[B-Man]

MEANWHILE, BACK IN DINOSAUR MEDIA:

 

The fight for the future of NPR: Can public radio survive the podcast revolution?

 

The tumult was touched off in

late March

, when an NPR executive announced that the network’s own digital offerings—most importantly, its marquee iPhone app, NPR One—were not to be promoted during shows airing on terrestrial radio.

The ban was widely viewed as proof that NPR is less interested in reaching young listeners than in placating the managers of local member stations, who pay handsome fees to broadcast NPR shows and tend to react with suspicion when NPR promotes its efforts to distribute those shows digitally.

 

 

 

 

 

Why, it’s as if taxpayer-funded public broadcasting was an outmoded idea in an era of satellite radio, hundreds of channels of digital television, and endless Websites and podcasts or something.

 

I’m old enough to remember multiple generations of Republicans vilified for even broaching the topic.

[Deranged Rhino]

Police arrest 400 at US Capitol in protest of money in politics

 

The mostly calm and orderly demonstration resulted in arrests for what the U.S. Capitol Police called "unlawful demonstration activity" such as crowding and obstruction.

Organizers vowed to repeat the demonstration every day for a week.

The protest was held "to demand Congress take immediate action to end the corruption of big money in our politics and ensure free and fair elections," Democracy Spring said on its website.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-capitol-demonstration-idUSKCN0X82M1

[TakeYouToTasker]

Police arrest 400 at US Capitol in protest of money in politics

 

The mostly calm and orderly demonstration resulted in arrests for what the U.S. Capitol Police called "unlawful demonstration activity" such as crowding and obstruction.

Organizers vowed to repeat the demonstration every day for a week.

The protest was held "to demand Congress take immediate action to end the corruption of big money in our politics and ensure free and fair elections," Democracy Spring said on its website.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-capitol-demonstration-idUSKCN0X82M1

Again, there is nothing Congress can do. Free Speech is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, reaffirmed by Citizen's United which correctly interpreted the Document. There is no law Congress can pass which will trump the High Law.

 

For this to occur, the Constitution itself would have to be amended; and the amending of the Constitution would be a tacit admission that money is in fact speech, and the amenders are simply seeking to restrict a type of speech that they find politically disadvantageous.

[Deranged Rhino]

Again, there is nothing Congress can do. Free Speech is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, reaffirmed by Citizen's United which correctly interpreted the Document. There is no law Congress can pass which will trump the High Law.

 

For this to occur, the Constitution itself would have to be amended; and the amending of the Constitution would be a tacit admission that money is in fact speech, and the amenders are simply seeking to restrict a type of speech that they find politically disadvantageous.

 

It's funny that's what you take from this story.

 

...Not the fact that peaceful protesters are being arrested for expressing their voice while the major American media outlets are silent.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

It's funny that's what you take from this story.

 

...Not the fact that peaceful protesters are being arrested for expressing their voice while the major American media outlets are silent.

When anyone on the left tells me that they are protesting peacefully, I approach them from a very skeptical place.

 

It's a case of the boy crying wolf. I don't believe them.

[B-Man]

I respectfully disagree DR.

 

After reading several other news reports, these protestors (while peaceful) specifically came to get arrested. They deliberately blocked access so the police would arrest them (and supposedly get more publicity)

 

The protest, organized under the name Democracy Spring, brought together activists from about 140 organizations who marched from Philadelphia to Washington last week. Similar acts of civil disobedience are scheduled throughout the week in Washington.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

When anyone on the left tells me that they are protesting peacefully, I approach them from a very skeptical place.

 

It's a case of the boy crying wolf. I don't believe them.

 

I'm not asking you to believe them. Just read up on the story... if you can find it. It's pretty clear we are quickly moving to a place where our right to free assembly and speech are taken away from us (along with privacy, due process -- both of which we've already lost) -- all in an effort to protect the big moneyed corporate interests who are actually running this country.

 

I respect you and know we'll probably never agree on this issue, but you should consider asking yourself if you're really being objective when you analyze this evolution within our system or if you're allowing the purposefully divisive political rhetoric (used by both sides) to distract you from doing so. You value libertarian ideals, your values and beliefs are under as much assault as mine in no small part due to the fact our democratic republic has been bought off.

I respectfully disagree DR.

 

After reading several other news reports, these protestors (while peaceful) specifically came to get arrested. They deliberately blocked access so the police would arrest them (and supposedly get more publicity)

 

The protest, organized under the name Democracy Spring, brought together activists from about 140 organizations who marched from Philadelphia to Washington last week. Similar acts of civil disobedience are scheduled throughout the week in Washington.

 

 

I have no doubts there were agitators within the crowd, there always are -- paid or otherwise. You and Tasker are right about that.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Deranged Rhino

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

I'm not asking you to believe them. Just read up on the story... if you can find it. It's pretty clear we are quickly moving to a place where our right to free assembly and speech are taken away from us (along with privacy, due process -- both of which we've already lost) -- all in an effort to protect the big moneyed corporate interests who are actually running this country.

 

I respect you and know we'll probably never agree on this issue, but you should consider asking yourself if you're really being objective when you analyze this evolution within our system or if you're allowing the purposefully divisive political rhetoric (used by both sides) to distract you doing so. You value libertarian ideals, your values and beliefs are under as much assault as mine in no small part due to the fact our democratic republic has been bought off.

I have read up on the story.

 

You don't have the right to assemble wherever the hell you want. When you assemble with the intention of obstructing other individuals, in areas you don't have the right to obstruct, you deal with the consequences.

 

The Right to Assemble was written to protect future citizens who might seek to meet, as the First Continental Congress did.

 

As to attacks on the Freedom of Speech, that's what folks like you are doing in regards to Citizens United, and what groups like Black Lives Matter pursue. Corporations are not assaulting your freedom of speech.

[Deranged Rhino]

I have read up on the story.

 

You don't have the right to assemble wherever the hell you want. When you assemble with the intention of obstructing other individuals, in areas you don't have the right to obstruct, you deal with the consequences.

 

The Right to Assemble was written to protect future citizens who might seek to meet, as the First Continental Congress did.

 

As to attacks on the Freedom of Speech, that's what folks like you are doing in regards to Citizens United, and what groups like Black Lives Matter pursue. Corporations are not assaulting your freedom of speech.

 

You are smart enough to know it's not a one sided issue.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

You are smart enough to know it's not a one sided issue.

The Freedom of Speech protects American citizens from having the peaceful and reasonably orderly projection of their ideas and ideals restricted by the Government.

 

That isn't under assault from corporations.

[DC Tom]

 

I'm not asking you to believe them. Just read up on the story... if you can find it. It's pretty clear we are quickly moving to a place where our right to free assembly and speech are taken away from us (along with privacy, due process -- both of which we've already lost) -- all in an effort to protect the big moneyed corporate interests who are actually running this country.

 

I respect you and know we'll probably never agree on this issue, but you should consider asking yourself if you're really being objective when you analyze this evolution within our system or if you're allowing the purposefully divisive political rhetoric (used by both sides) to distract you from doing so. You value libertarian ideals, your values and beliefs are under as much assault as mine in no small part due to the fact our democratic republic has been bought off.

 

I have no doubts there were agitators within the crowd, there always are -- paid or otherwise. You and Tasker are right about that.

 

In almost every protest I've been involved in, there has been a certain number of people who's specific and explicit role in the protest was to get arrested.

[Tiberius]

I have read up on the story.

 

You don't have the right to assemble wherever the hell you want. When you assemble with the intention of obstructing other individuals, in areas you don't have the right to obstruct, you deal with the consequences.

 

The Right to Assemble was written to protect future citizens who might seek to meet, as the First Continental Congress did.

 

As to attacks on the Freedom of Speech, that's what folks like you are doing in regards to Citizens United, and what groups like Black Lives Matter pursue. Corporations are not assaulting your freedom of speech.

But it's ok to scream over someone else's speech rights by throwing tons of money into the propaganda microphone. Gotcha!

[IDBillzFan]

But it's ok to scream over someone else's speech rights by throwing tons of money into the propaganda microphone. Gotcha!

 

Hey, tell us again how the CBO is a propaganda machine.

 

We'll wait.

[TakeYouToTasker]

But it's ok to scream over someone else's speech rights by throwing tons of money into the propaganda microphone. Gotcha!

No one's free speech rights are infringed upon, or screamed over, by someone else purchasing adds in order to exercise their rights to free speech. The listener is perfectly able to hear both arguments, and decided for either one, a different point of view entirely, or none at all.

[Tiberius]

No one's free speech rights are infringed upon, or screamed over, by someone else purchasing adds in order to exercise their rights to free speech. The listener is perfectly able to hear both arguments, and decided for either one, a different point of view entirely, or none at all.

Ya, it can be screamed over, no doubt.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Ya, it can be screamed over, no doubt.

Please explain how running adjacent ads, sold with equal opportunity, across multiple platforms, content providers, and mediums constitutes "screaming over"? Edited April 12, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker

[Deranged Rhino]

 

In almost every protest I've been involved in, there has been a certain number of people who's specific and explicit role in the protest was to get arrested.

 

100%. I don't deny that one bit. Professional agitators and even amateur agitators loooove the press that comes with that sort of result.

[Deranged Rhino]

No one's free speech rights are infringed upon, or screamed over, by someone else purchasing adds in order to exercise their rights to free speech. The listener is perfectly able to hear both arguments, and decided for either one, a different point of view entirely, or none at all.

 

I think this may be where we are talking over one another's heads.

 

I'm not really talking about free speech. If I understand your position correctly (and I may not), you've made the case before that the content of those political ads is irrelevant even if they're bold faced lies. The onus is on the individual hearing the message to filter out the lies from the truth, a form of informational Darwinism if you will. Furthermore, attempting to limit an individual's ability to put out political ads, regardless of their merit, is a violation of our first amendment rights because it puts the government in charge of deciding which political messages are appropriate or not. That is an understandable, and prior to 2010, a reasonable position to take when talking about political communication (the key phrase in Buckley v. Valeo). The intent of SCOTUS's decision in '76 was to prevent the censorship of political speech -- a cause I think we both can agree is noble.

 

But this also isn't what I'm talking about in these various threads. It's an entirely separate point altogether because it's not about political communication during an election. It's about corruption of the system itself.

 

The money going into the system isn't just being used to buy ads and "political communication"; it's being used to buy politicians and legislation. That's a MAJOR difference, and in turn it disenfranchises large swaths of the electorate who cannot afford to legally buy a sitting US Senator just to get their issues heard on the floor.