from today's blog by ERIC BYLER
As my friend and co-host Michael Charney has pointed out from the Republican vantage point, if Republicans oppose laws that curtail the amount of influence corporations and super-wealthy individuals can have on our elections because such spending HELPS their electoral chances, isn't it also a fair criticism that Democrats want to limit the influence of said corporations and aristocrats because their involvement HURTS their electoral chances? Michael has pointed out, much to the dismay of liberals and progressives, that Opera Winfrey has given money to politicians on the Democratic side. If money in politics is a corrupting influence when it flows into Republican coffers, why not also when it benefits Democrats? And, aren't both parties acting in their self-interest when they vote on a party line on bills like the DISCLOSE Act?
We want to hear from you this week to see where YOU draw the line. Should there be a $ limit? People only, but not corporations? Why is it that, for some, intention is the driving force? Why is it that Dems justify Maher's donations and Reps justify the Kochs?
Sorry we couldn't complete your registration. Please try again.
Please enter your email to finish creating your account.
Receive a personalized list of podcasts based on your preferences.