The last couple of election cycles we’ve heard nothing but blathering about how much money there is in campaigning – billions! It is a lot of money but in our media driven culture, it is costly. But I also remember that in our country’s infancy, the price paid by those anonymous pamphleteers were paying a high price to get their message out as well – yet they paid it. Those papers were a force multiplier – it allowed them to get their viewpoint out faster and more efficiently compared to hauling around a soapbox from corner to corner. It was the essence of free speech – but there was a cost. Just like today.
Jim Rubens, who ran for US Senate from NH this past election cycle, stopped by Steve’s post “Democrat Priorities are Not America’s Priorities” that spoke about campaign finance left a comment (here, in part):
“Campaign finance reform” (the Dem nomenclature for political money corruption where campaign cash is traded for votes, and votes usually to preferentially enrich the contributor) is an issue for conservatives and for Republicans. The difference is between Dem and GOP approaches to fixing the problem. I like term limits and vouchers that voters can give to any candidate they can vote for (costing taxpayers about 1/10 of 1% of the current federal budget).
My response was this:
Hi Jim – nice to have you drop by! Term limits I can agree with but I ABSOLUTELY reject the idea that I should be taxed anymore just so someone else can use my redirected money and give it to someone else that may well be 180 degrees from my political outlook. Let them take it out of their OWN DAMN pockets and leave mine alone.
And after the horrible things done to Prop 8 donors (listed under the guise of transparency) it is clear that such listings become easy pickings for those that wish to seek revenge and retribution against those that simply disagree with them politically (e.g., Brendan Eich, formally of Mozilla, being the poster child and the gay militant bunch caused him to lose his job simply because he had donated $1K for Prop 8 – so they wrecked his career after founding Mozilla).
Look at all the “other stuff” that Americans spend their money (and not to worry, there’s lots of people for each of those things that think they are bad for you and would love to make it more expensive for you to do so as well. Don’t buy candy, don’t buy soda, GUNS KILL, dry cleaning materials pollute, lawn fertilizer causes algael bloom, movies are too violent, and you’re throwing your money away on lotteries (so we should limit your spending on it too!). I’m tired of these busybodies – just Leave Me Alone! But in the big scheme of things – election spending is small, small potatoes.
The RedState post that had this graphic ended with this:
“So the next time you see a liberal elitist pontificate on TV about the evil of money in politics, remember he’s talking about your free speech and he’s ignoring the facts.”
Frankly, I don’t much cotton to the idea that ANYONE should tell me how I can or can’t spend my own money – nor tell me that I can only say just so much for just so long because they “know” what is best for me. Best for me? They just can’t be truthful: it is about THEM believing they have the right to CENSOR me for my own good.
Screw that. Leave. Me. Alone.
********
Update: Forgot I had bookmarked this:
Democratic donors may be among the midterm election’s biggest losers, as figures from the Center for Responsive Politics reveal Democrat-aligned groups spent $1.64 billion dollars, a sum nearly equal to that of Republican-aligned groups who spent $1.75 billion.
Among election night’s biggest losers was Democrat billionaire hedge fund king and global warming activist Tom Steyer. The election’s single largest donor, Steyer shelled out $74 million, $67 million of which went to bankroll his NextGen super PAC.
Billionaire Democrats are not the only ones likely to be annoyed by getting so little bang for their buck. Indeed, throughout the campaign, many Democrats complained that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee flooded their email inboxes with myriad messages bearing hyperbolic subject lines, such as “All hope is lost.”
In the end, however, perhaps that subject line proved prescient, as Democrats suffered a historic and crushing defeat that cost them $1.64 billion.
Remember – NO ONE is forcing ANYONE to spend this money on politics. This is not about corruption (there may be – just as in any of the above sectors listed above) – it is about MY Freedom to say what I want, where I want, and how I want as long as it is MY money. True, I have little to spend but that isn’t the point: it is about Principle. A buck, ten bucks, one large, or millions (George Soros, Koch brothers) – it is not the amount but the Principle of Freedom without Government (or anyone else) telling me no. I hurt no one, and really, no one is obligated to listen to me or read my stuff, when I express my message.
Certainly, when Bill Binnie ran for US Senate the cycle before this just past one, he spent and spent lots given the size of NH. He proved the maxim – lots of money does not always mean lots of votes. And this time the Democrats did not learn from his example.
The only people who force you to pay for anything political are the tax collectors – there is no choice in that.
