BUY BUY BUSH - Page 2

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own

Article comments

Subscribe to comment RSS

• 1 - Scott Pepper

  Mar 03, 2004 at 1:08 am

  Kerry's no angel either. From the same source:
  
  Kerry's PAC raised roughly $1 million through the end of 2002 and disbursed nearly all of it. At the time it was formed, the Citizen Soldiers Fund's non-federal account could theoretically have accepted any amount from a donor. But Kerry, perhaps as a concession to the reform constituency of which he was a part, said the fund would not take donations of more than $10,000 from one individual or organization in any year. Just before the McCain-Feingold legislation was to take effect consigning soft moneyâ€"at least some types of itâ€"to history, the senator couldn't resist one last grab at the political money that he voted to ban. By the end of October, the self-imposed cap was gone.
  
  Before Kerry closed the account some time before the end of 2002, the Citizen Soldier Fund raised approximately $1.35 million in soft money, thanks mainly to a series of big checks written by some of his long-time patrons. The largest donor to the Fund was Miami lawyer Milton Ferrell, who gave $59,000. Other big givers included the CEO of Boston Capital, John P. Manning, who contributed $55,000, International Data Group chairman Patrick J. McGovern ($50,000) and the American International Group, Inc. ($30,000).
  
  Additionally, Kerry's top ten career contributors include three financial service firms to Bush's seven, but also five major law firms, all with aggressive policy agendas:
  
  Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo $232,736
  FleetBoston Financial Corp. $183,037
  Time Warner $145,435
  Hale and Dorr LLP $129,858
  Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom $125,550
  Harvard University $124,250
  Hill, Holliday, Connors, Cosmopulos Inc. $122,300
  Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson & Hand/Piper Rudnick $121,550
  Citigroup $116,656
  Goldman Sachs Group $110,600
  
  Either candidate will be beholden to these special interests come January. We can count on Kerry to dole out just as many special favors to his contibutors as Bush has. Either way, it's the American people who lose.
  
  Scott

• 2 - Shark

  Mar 03, 2004 at 8:34 am

  Scott,
  
  I agree, Kerry has almost as many bribes as Bush. (I think he'll end up being about $100 million short?) So for me, it comes down to the lesser of two evils: I vote for whomever raises the least amount of money.
  
  But point well taken: the shame of American politics is still the legal bribery/campaign finance system. Which, btw, will never change because the people who benefit make the laws.
  
  Puppet on the Left -vs- Puppet on the Right
  
  Scott, tell ya' what: I'll promise to vote for Nader if you promise to vote for Nader.
  
  Deal?
  

• 3 - Tom

  Mar 03, 2004 at 8:39 am

  What is wrong with tax cuts for "the rich"? Do you even know what that means? According to the IRS, that means a family making over 90,000 a year.
  
  They pay more in taxes then lower class people make a year, is that right?
  
  I would rather have them have more of their money to invest or start a business.

• 4 - Shark

  Mar 03, 2004 at 8:54 am

  Tom, I think the rich should pay higher taxes in order to finance the job of keeping the poor off their doorsteps and out of their yards.
  
  I haven't met a rich person yet who will argue with that.
  
  BTW: I'll be announcing my candidacy in the coming days.
  
  

• 5 - Scott Pepper

  Mar 03, 2004 at 10:15 am

  Scott, tell ya' what: I'll promise to vote for Nader if you promise to vote for Nader.
  
  Deal?
  
  Deal. My vote for Bush or for Kerry would count for nothing here in MA anyway.

• 6 - Eric Olsen

  Mar 03, 2004 at 11:19 am

  Votes always count for "something."
  
  Shark, you used stats - I'm shocked.

• 7 - Mark Saleski

  Mar 03, 2004 at 11:24 am

  Votes always count for "something."
  
  man, i wish they would at least modify the electoral vote thing so that all states grant the votes proportionally.
  
  new hampshire almost always goes republican so i feel like my vote is wasted.
  
  i guess i could always move to nebraska or maine (actually, i certain i will move back to maine at some point)

• 8 - Eric Olsen

  Mar 03, 2004 at 11:35 am

  But that's just for presidential elections, and just because you don't "win" doesn't mean you aren't counted.

• 9 - Scott Pepper

  Mar 03, 2004 at 11:51 am

  A vote for a Republican in a national election in Massachusetts is like a lone voice in the wilderness. Sure, it technically "counts" for something, but it doesn't really amount to much of anything.

• 10 - Eric Olsen

  Mar 03, 2004 at 11:54 am

  What seems to be very often forgotten in these kinds of discussions is that voting does two things: it determines a winner in a given election, but it also is a method of stating each voter's preferences, and this second function is never lost, even in the biggest landslide.

• 11 - Hal Pawluk

  Mar 03, 2004 at 12:47 pm

  Ther's a big difference between what Kerry might do and what Bush and the Republican majority in Congress are doing.
  
  The FDA is helping the drug companies keep their prices exorbitantly high.
  
  Republican House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas has been trying to replace a $5 billion/year subsidy to exporters with an $8.5 billion/year to multinationals (which would encourage off-shoring of jobs).
  
  The Medicare bill has at least $40 billion of corporate welfare for drug companies (and the Farm Bill did the same for Archer Daniels Midlands and nine other huge agricultural companies, except the subsidies were twice as high).
  
  Republican FCC Chairman Michael Powell pushed through rules changes that gave a pass to huge media companies that were in violation of previous regulations.
  
  Republican Powell also tried to give a $10 billion/year gift to phone companies a few months ago and when that was over-ridden by the vote of a Republican who couldn't stomach it, Powell provided ammo to the phone companies for a law-suit which just ended today and phone bills will now take another $10 billion/year from local subscribers like you and me.
  
  The "energy bill" ( spelled P-O-R-K) will .... Hell, I could go on forever.
  
  Sure, members of both parties engage in pay-offs, but I have never seen it as extreme as it has been since the Republicans got the House majority. It has been getting worse every year, and the Republicans are recklessly, shamelessly redistributing wealth from taxpayers to businesses and stockholders.
  
  That Bill Thomas attempt to subsidize off-shoring of jobs was the one that finally got to me ... it's so bad even Republicans are choking on it and it has been in the works so long that the WTO has started sanctions. I have more on this one at Stop Subsidies For Off-Shore Jobs on my site.
  
  I would think a true conservative (maybe not a neocon, whatever that is) would want to stop that, even if it meant voting for a Kerry - voting for Bush sure as hell isn't going to do it.
  
  
  

• 12 - Shark

  Mar 03, 2004 at 4:27 pm

  Scott: A vote for a Republican in a national election in Massachusetts is like a lone voice in the wilderness.
  
  Hey, try being an elite intellectual left-wing liberal in Texas. Ahahah.
  
  Hell, I can't even GET to the friggin' polls; they see me comin' and pull that "Howdy, hippie!" shotgun scene from Easy Rider on me.
  
  BTW: Hal's right as always; it's NEVER been this bad or blatant. This administration can't be beat when it comes to favors for the rich.
  
  Well, there was Reagan.
  
  

• 13 - CW Fisher

  Mar 04, 2004 at 2:56 am

  Reagan's still here. They say you can hear him sometimes late at night faintly padding down the hall calling "Mommy...?" Some say there's a hatchet in his back, left there by people like Bush, Bush and Bush. Say what you will about Ronnie, but he never had to buy an election. He paid for his microphone. Money has always been part of the game but I honestly doubt its power. Hearts aren't bought and votes aren't either. People go the way they go no matter how much money you have -- unless you give them some. Then you got 'em. The laws should be changed as often as a light bulb but it can never be outlawed. It's too far gone. It's a good subject though, Shark. I liked the art. And was astonished at the stats. What's next? Graphs? Poems to your frickin tattoo? &;~]
  

• 14 - CW Fisher

  Mar 04, 2004 at 3:01 am

  Liberal Texan? In Texas? Then you must know Molly, whom I adore. I imagine her bald as a cue ball beneath that Annie wig. But she writes like the wind. I don't know what that means. Writes like the wind. But I'm leavin' it in on account of my non-negotiable no-editing clause that I inserted into my blogger contract. When I blog, "what I have written, I have written," said Caesar.
  
  Sid Caesar?

• 15 - Shark

  Mar 04, 2004 at 8:51 am

  re. Molly, a liberal Texan.
  
  Yeah, you're right! That makes TWO of us!
  
  There are a few slight differences between me and Molly:
  
  1) I don't do stats or homework too often;
  
  2) she's kinder and gentler;
  
  3) my hormones are balanced.
  
  4) I served in Nam; she went AWOL from a National Guard puff-job.
  
  
  
  

• 16 - Tom

  Mar 08, 2004 at 6:37 am

  Center for Public Integrity. Isn't that spelled: "Greenpeace" ?

• 17 - Shark

  Mar 08, 2004 at 11:37 am

  Tom: "Center for Public Integrity. Isn't that spelled: "Greenpeace" ?"
  
  Actually, it's spelled "F.E.C."-- as in "Federal Elections Commission."
  
  But thanks for asking!
  
  

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.

Name:

URL:

Remember name and url?

Comment:

Please preview your comment.