At 04:44 PM 1/21/2010, John Gulick wrote:
>AR writes:
>
>
>
>I guess corporate personhood rules the day, as usual.
>
>
>
>JG wonders:
>
>So, the Supreme Court just ruled in favor of unrestricted corporate
>donations to political candidates.
>This ruling comes just after a season in which the Democrats proved (once
>again) that they are loyal
>servants of big capital. Yes, the Supreme Court ruling is merely the coup
>de grace in an entrenched
>process by which corporate power decisively molds public opinion and
>determines political outcomes.
>And yes, the DP has always been a faithful water carrier for big capital
>-- as well as an apparatus for
>demobilizing social movements, while (very) occasionally attending to some
>of their demands. But I ask
>you, has a qualitiatively new stage of degeneration been breached? (Most)
>devout opponents of
>lesser evilism seem to think that third party organizing is virtually
>hopeless, even as they scoff at the
>discliplining effect of "being realistic."
ditto. me no get.
who cares? the fun part, now, will be watching commercials for candidates where it's very obvious who they support and how much they doled out to do so.
next best part: will they get away with creating commercials for both candidates the way they contribute to both now?
it will be so much easier for people to actually _see_ the corporations supporting the candidate.
not that it will matter or enlighten or change things, but i always like a horse race, especially when I have no horse in the race.
not to mention a friend's, also a republican strategist at one time, who once said of conservatives (who he loathed, being a business republican himself):
"one of the lessons of 1964 that conservatives learned was that it was more important for voters to feel like they were informed than to actually be informed. conservatives now have several places where they can learn this lesson several times a year."
-- ac, the Politics list