Peer Reviewed Journal says that the US is an Oligarchy, not a Representative Republic

[Mac1958]

Funny how you can't explain why politicians, who benefit from money, want to keep people from spending money.

I'm not sure what this means. Who are they trying to keep from spending money?

Our political system is just FLOODED with money. It buys influence everywhere. Isn't this just common knowledge?

.

Apparently you slept through the whole, bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, AKA McCain-Feingold. You know the one I mean, the one that led to the court decisions you have been whinging about in this thread.

"Whining".

McCain-Feingold accomplished little. It may have made things worse.

And now you think money is not corrupting and distorting our political system?

Is that really your position?

.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm not sure what this means. Who are they trying to keep from spending money?

Our political system is just FLOODED with money. It buys influence everywhere. Isn't this just common knowledge?

.

Apparently you slept through the whole, bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, AKA McCain-Feingold. You know the one I mean, the one that led to the court decisions you have been whinging about in this thread.

"Whining".

McCain-Feingold accomplished little. It may have made things worse.

And now you think money is not corrupting and distorting our political system?

Is that really your position?

.

For the last fucking time, your political system is corrupting my money.

 

[Mac1958]

Apparently you slept through the whole, bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, AKA McCain-Feingold. You know the one I mean, the one that led to the court decisions you have been whinging about in this thread.

"Whining".

McCain-Feingold accomplished little. It may have made things worse.

And now you think money is not corrupting and distorting our political system?

Is that really your position?

.

For the last fucking time, your political system is corrupting my money.

Why so cranky?

I don't know how you can separate the two, unless that's just standard party line. That must be it.

And I realize that denial is a fundamental part of partisan ideology, but holy CRAP. Pretty impressive the way you folks can just deny the obvious. It's like dealing with one of the lefties here who deny that PC even exists.

.

 

[Silhouette]

Peer Reviewed Journal says that the US is an Oligarchy, not a Representative Republic

That was made official with Citizen's United. The new unlimited campaign funding is the final nail in the coffin of democracy.

 

[whitehall]

The words "peer reviewed" turns an editorial into fact? The problem for low information lefties is that their peers are low information lefties.

 

[deltex1]

The words "peer reviewed" turns an editorial into fact? The problem for low information lefties is that their peers are low information lefties.

See post 39.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"Whining".

McCain-Feingold accomplished little. It may have made things worse.

And now you think money is not corrupting and distorting our political system?

Is that really your position?

.

For the last fucking time, your political system is corrupting my money.

Why so cranky?

I don't know how you can separate the two, unless that's just standard party line. That must be it.

And I realize that denial is a fundamental part of partisan ideology, but holy CRAP. Pretty impressive the way you folks can just deny the obvious. It's like dealing with one of the lefties here who deny that PC even exists.

.

It takes power to corrupt something. Which has more power, government or money? Why the fuck is that si hard to understand? Is it because you prefer to have your explanations handed to you than actually think?

 

[Mac1958]

It takes power to corrupt something. Which has more power, government or money? Why the fuck is that si hard to understand? Is it because you prefer to have your explanations handed to you than actually think?

No, power corrupts, but not exclusively. Money can certainly corrupt as well, because it buys power. Money can influence as well, especially in politics.

Obviously.

If all you can do is spin and insult, I'll exit this conversation. I'm sure there's a left wing partisan ideologue counterpart here who's willing who's willing to play those games with you.

.

 

[natstew]

Money equals speech because a crucifix is a jar of urine equals speech.

There is a reason why our founders used the word speech instead of expression.

The biggest mistake of the U.S. Supreme Court was when they ruled that expression was speech.

Speech is a form of expression. Expression is not a form of speech.
Speech has one form, words coming out of a mouth. Expression has many forms, almost unlimited.

If the framers of our Constitution intended for Speech and expression to be the same thing they would never have added the freedom of the press clause to the 1st amendment, it would be redundant.
The way they wrote the first amendment clearly shows they intended speech to be limited to sound in the form of words, not a crucifix in a jar of urine or money.

But, being where we are now, if Unions, BAR associations, Medical associations, or any other organizations can make unlimited donations to political Parties or candidates so can Corporations. Both are people incorporated into a group.

 

[natstew]

We are supposed to be a Representative Republic though where the politicians are supposed to be representing all American's, not just the ones able to buy them to do their bidding.

The study clearly shows that they are not representing the common American, even a little bit.

I recall something in our history that was a pretty Big Deal about a Revolution and no Taxation without Representation.

Why am I paying taxes to enrich a bunch of cockroaches?

[SIZE="3"]You mean the Representative Republic founded by rich white men? The Republic that only allowed propertied white men to vote?

Hint: That's a oligarchy. It's always been about money.

[/SIZE]

Would you rather talk about the ones founded by rich black men in Africa, you know, the blacks who sold white shipwrecked sailors to Arabians as slaves, that is, the whites that survived the forced march across the desert.

 

[Sallow]

We are supposed to be a Representative Republic though where the politicians are supposed to be representing all American's, not just the ones able to buy them to do their bidding.

The study clearly shows that they are not representing the common American, even a little bit.

I recall something in our history that was a pretty Big Deal about a Revolution and no Taxation without Representation.

Why am I paying taxes to enrich a bunch of cockroaches?

[SIZE="3"]You mean the Representative Republic founded by rich white men? The Republic that only allowed propertied white men to vote?

Hint: That's a oligarchy. It's always been about money.

[/SIZE]

Would you rather talk about the ones founded by rich black men in Africa, you know, the blacks who sold white shipwrecked sailors to Arabians as slaves, that is, the whites that survived the forced march across the desert.

You just glean that off of stormfront?

 

[flacaltenn]

It takes power to corrupt something. Which has more power, government or money? Why the fuck is that si hard to understand? Is it because you prefer to have your explanations handed to you than actually think?

No, power corrupts, but not exclusively. Money can certainly corrupt as well, because it buys power. Money can influence as well, especially in politics.

Obviously.

If all you can do is spin and insult, I'll exit this conversation. I'm sure there's a left wing partisan ideologue counterpart here who's willing who's willing to play those games with you.

.

To paraphrase the NRA, Mac.......... "If you outlaw favors thru power -- only criminals will buy favor"..
It's pretty damn clear because NEITHER party wants to fix it -- but the PEOPLE do...

Some of the idiotcy proposed to limit campaign contributions suggests that you can only BUY a politician when it's mating season.. We know that's bunk... We also know that favors don't have to returned with cold cash.. So the NECCESSARY prereq is the power to grant these favors. Shouldn't be part of Congress's daily routine...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It takes power to corrupt something. Which has more power, government or money? Why the fuck is that si hard to understand? Is it because you prefer to have your explanations handed to you than actually think?

No, power corrupts, but not exclusively. Money can certainly corrupt as well, because it buys power. Money can influence as well, especially in politics.

Obviously.

If all you can do is spin and insult, I'll exit this conversation. I'm sure there's a left wing partisan ideologue counterpart here who's willing who's willing to play those games with you.

.

Remember when Gates was rich, but didn't care about politics? How did that go over with Washington?

If all you do is ignore fucking reality you can go off and pretend you won.

 

[flacaltenn]

Washington TAUGHT Gates that its pay to play.. Not naive virgin anymore....

 

[dcraelin]

You know, if we restrict the power that the Federal Government can exercise, then it will not matter one whit how much money the wealthy throw at politicians. If they are forbidden from doing anything that is not authorized by the Constitution, then you could throw the entire sum of all the worlds currency at a politician and they would not be permitted to do anything that was outside the enumerated responsibilities of government.

Oh...wait.....We are supposed to have that already, but there are people who want to make laws based on 'whats good for some people', rather than was it good for ALL the people....

Never mind....

when we had a smaller government we also had slavery......we also had an era of child workers with little workplace protections and rules...............DC is too big.....that is for sure....but there has to be a place the powerless can go to enforce rules of basic decency.

 

[dcraelin]

The fun thing is that the people with bags of cash are now actively involved in crafting legislation and getting rid of legislation they don't like.

They've been doing it for years...now they're just really fucking blatant about it.

It is a small comfort to me that the bags of cash don't always work. Meg Whitman spent $177 million to Jerry Brown's $36 million and got stomped.

Which might prove something if the outcomes of elections made any real difference.


As ought to be obvious after the transfer of power friom BUSH II to Obama I, nothing significant truly changes when one party takes over from the other.

the money buys both major parties and crowds out the third parties that would actually come up with meaningful and usefull change.

 

[JakeStarkey]

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/G...ens and Page 2014-Testing Theories 3-7-14.pdf

Here is the link for the complete article. It is very liberal and, yes, it whinges.

 

[flacaltenn]

You know, if we restrict the power that the Federal Government can exercise, then it will not matter one whit how much money the wealthy throw at politicians. If they are forbidden from doing anything that is not authorized by the Constitution, then you could throw the entire sum of all the worlds currency at a politician and they would not be permitted to do anything that was outside the enumerated responsibilities of government.

Oh...wait.....We are supposed to have that already, but there are people who want to make laws based on 'whats good for some people', rather than was it good for ALL the people....

Never mind....

when we had a smaller government we also had slavery......we also had an era of child workers with little workplace protections and rules...............DC is too big.....that is for sure....but there has to be a place the powerless can go to enforce rules of basic decency.

Child labor laws is an example of what Congress SHOULD be doing.. Paying GE $60 for every Energy Star appliance they sell is an example of graft and corruption --- but it's also law that they didn't have the power to pass..

OR -- it's severely misinterpreted law by Dept of Energy or EPA...

 

[dcraelin]

You know, if we restrict the power that the Federal Government can exercise, then it will not matter one whit how much money the wealthy throw at politicians. If they are forbidden from doing anything that is not authorized by the Constitution, then you could throw the entire sum of all the worlds currency at a politician and they would not be permitted to do anything that was outside the enumerated responsibilities of government.

Oh...wait.....We are supposed to have that already, but there are people who want to make laws based on 'whats good for some people', rather than was it good for ALL the people....

Never mind....

when we had a smaller government we also had slavery......we also had an era of child workers with little workplace protections and rules...............DC is too big.....that is for sure....but there has to be a place the powerless can go to enforce rules of basic decency.

Child labor laws is an example of what Congress SHOULD be doing.. Paying GE $60 for every Energy Star appliance they sell is an example of graft and corruption --- but it's also law that they didn't have the power to pass..

OR -- it's severely misinterpreted law by Dept of Energy or EPA...

I am against lots of different government subsidys but ones in the area of energy efficiency might help us ease into an era of higher energy costs. This could be forward thinking actually... Now, I dont know the percentage of the appliance that subsidizes, might be excessive.

As to its Constitutionality, Im not sure, but I doubt the courts would prohibit it.

 

[georgephillip]

"Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics – which can be characterized
as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic Elite Domination, and two types of
interest group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism – offers different
predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average
citizens; economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented.

My guess would be Economic Elite Domination.
What's yours?

http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf