home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.

   DEBATE      Enjoy opinions shoved down your throat      4,105 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 1,625 of 4,105   
   Matt Munson to All   
   Something written by me!   
   12 May 12 10:18:30   
   
   Hello everybody.   
      
   There Should Be No Secrecy In Political Donations   
      
   For any successful campaign you need money. Money is the fuel for speech.   
   However there are cases in businesses and individuals clouding their donations   
   because people did not want their donations exposed to scrutiny. Recently a   
   top Romney donor Frank VanderSloot had customers cancel their business   
   relationships with him because they did not want to patronize a businessman   
   who had views that were contrary to their principles because Frank harbors   
   deep prejudices to the LGBT community.   
      
   President Obamas campaign has showcased a few of the top donors to his   
   campaign in the website Keeping the GOP Honest. Conservative blogs consider   
   this as an enemies list, but knowing who candidates are getting funds from are   
   a healthy indicator of what type of interest and policies candidates are   
   getting their appeal from. However instead of crying to your compatriots about   
   how Obama is hurting your business, scrutinize Obamas contributors to his   
   Super PAC and his regular campaign committees as well. I bet Obama has just as   
   many shady characters just as much as Romney.   
      
   Individuals and businesses should be able to stand by their donations instead   
   of hiding from them. If you did not like my donations to Ron Paul, then you   
   should be free to patronize or not patronize me if I was a captain of   
   industry. I think its responsible for consumers to pull out their business if   
   business people have principles contrary to their values.   
      
   Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Just as how Fred Karger exposed the major   
   players who helped to fund discrimination in California, people should have   
   the choice not to patronize the San Diego storage business owner Terry Caster   
   who spent over 693,000 in sponsoring Proposition 8. Even the National   
   Organization for Marriage wants people to boycott Starbucks, but unfortunately   
   for them their boycott targets usually get more business.   
      
   Target also received negative publicity for supporting an inequality loving   
   candidate for Minnesota Governor as well, even though Target portrays   
   themselves with a progressive ethos their corporate office sent money to help   
   defeated candidate Tom Emmer which gave them negative press and even Lady Gaga   
   dropped her deal to promote her new album with the chain. They said helping   
   Tom Emmer was because of his economic policies, but maybe Target should of   
   realized they need to raise a crop of legislators who may be pro-corporation,   
   but makes sure not to treat LGBT people as second class citizens.   
      
   With the Citizens United decision, it has opened the floodgates for corporate   
   political donations. Since corporations want their outsized influence, the   
   American people deserve to know how our political candidates and causes are   
   being sponsored. We should know who our political candidates are being   
   beholden to or what they stand for. Unfortunately there is another roadblock   
   to transparency.   
      
   Donors of a 501(c)4 should have their donations automatically disclosed, just   
   as how it took 4 years to find out that Romney hid his donation for the   
   Proposition 8 donations. Even though it was questionable about leaking the   
   information, the information should be legalized in the future. If a group   
   influences public policy, secrecy is not an option.   
      
   Even the Supreme Court stated that signatures for ballot measures are not   
   confidential. Doe v. Reed states that disclosure of signatures on a ballot   
   measure does not violate the first amendment.   
      
   If a political candidate wants to restrict your civil rights or ship your job   
   to China, India or Mexico you should be aware of the implications of   
   supporting that candidate for office.   
      
   Matt   
      
      
   --- SBBSecho 2.13-Win32   
    * Origin: inlandutopia.dtdns.net - inland utopia bbs (1:218/109)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca