![]() |
|
Tags for This Article:
Congress (3267) Impeachment (3188) Impeachment (3188) Bush GW (2263) Bush Admin (2075) Bush Crimes (1463) Bush Enemy Of Democracy (1116) Bush Enemy Of Human Rights (861) Bush Idiot-in-Chief (850) Bush Admin (822) Bush Reasons To Prosecute (753) Bush Enemy Of Civil Rights (530) Bush Denier-in-Chief (481) Bush Failed Fiscal Policy (466) Bush Sadist-in-Chief (181)
|
(more...)
(less...)
Add to My Group
According to FEC data, major party congressional candidates who raised the most money won 92% of their primary races in 2006. Candidates who spent the most won 91% of the time. Winning candidates out-raised their opponents by a margin of 3.5-to-1, with the winners raising an average of $1.06 million and losers raising $304,000. This pattern held true for open seat races as well. The biggest fundraiser won 82% of the contests without an incumbent running for re-election in the district. That same article also states: Without personal wealth or the ability to raise large sums of money from well-heeled contributors, many aspiring officeholders are locked out of the process before the first vote is cast. Those voters who wish to express views that are not supported by wealthy donors are left without an outlet. In that revolutionary general election of 2006 that was all about the war and the unpopular President and about big new ideas, the candidate who spent the most won in 93 percent of House races, and 2/3 of Senate races.* Even though those numbers were down from 2004, money was still more decisive than anything else. Finally, a title from a March 11, 2007 article in the Washington Post says it all about our auction . . . er . . . election system: “Money’s Going to Talk in 2008”. *Incumbents Linked to Corruption Lose, But Money Still Wins http://www.opensecrets.org/pressreleases/2006/PostElection.11.8.asp Money Talks For 2008 Indeed Look at the current front-runners for President:
Bottom line OK, I’ve gone on long enough. The bottom line follows. Bill Clinton could be impeached because, despite his moderate economic conservatism reflected in welfare reduction and deregulation, he was considered a mild threat because he raised taxes, attempted universal health care and had a populist streak that could have borne fruit for the lower classes at the expense of the upper had he been able to sell that part of his vision undistracted by impeachment. In short, impeachment served the interests of great wealth. George Bush is the elitist, capitalist, big corporate, gilded-age, Robber-Barron, uber-class’s wet dream. He really is. Everything he does that makes absolutely no sense at all to most people, makes perfect sense to great, vested wealth. Everything Bush does is designed to protect and enable that wealth and to allow it to grow and grow at any and all cost. Anyone who tries to end the wet dream will be treated quite nastily by this extremely powerful and ruthless class of people. We cannot expect people like Nancy Pelosi, John Kerrey and the other multi-millionaires to rock the boat of unfettered capitalism that has been so good to them and their families for so long. We can’t expect elected officials who are wholly dependent on donations from big corporations and wealthy individuals to take on the direct vested interests of those on whom their careers depend. John Edwards is perhaps an exception, if only because he got wealthy taking on big corporations as a trial lawyer on behalf of injured people and does not fear the corporations or believe his future is as tied to theirs as others apparently feel. No, sadly, just like the 2004 Presidential election, the 2004 and 2006 Congressional elections, and just like run-up to the 2008 primaries are currently going, the most significant factor in impeachment of Bush and Cheney is MONEY. MONEY says no, and we all know,
http://madnessofdivinity.blogspot.com Bruce is 46 year-old father of one, stepfather of three and grandfather of two, who left a lucrative law practice at a large national law firm to work, advocate and write for social justice and equality and find a way to incorporate a spiritual life into the material world. He now struggles along to make a decent living while holding true to his deepest principles in Portland Oregon.
Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||