
That said, my greater source of personal concern, outrage and sympathy beyond this particular case is focused neither upon one night’s property damage nor upon the acts, but is focused rather upon the past four-decade period during which an American political elite have shipped middle class and working class jobs away from Baltimore and cities and towns around the U.S. to third-world dictatorships like China and others, plunged tens of millions of good, hard-working Americans into economic devastation, and then followed that action around the nation by diminishing every American’s civil rights protections in order to control an unfairly impoverished population living under an ever-declining standard of living and suffering at the butt end of an ever-more militarized and aggressive surveillance state.
The innocent working families of all backgrounds whose lives and dreams have been cut short by excessive violence, surveillance, and other abuses of the Bill of Rights by government pay the true price, and ultimate price, and one that far exceeds the importances of any kids’ game played tonight, or ever, at Camden Yards. We need to keep in mind people are suffering and dying around the U.S., and while we are thankful no one was injured at Camden Yards, there is a far bigger picture for poor Americans in Baltimore and everywhere who don’t have jobs and are losing economic civil and legal rights, and this makes inconvenience at a ballgame irrelevant in light of the needless suffering government is inflicting upon ordinary Americans.
– Commentary by Baltimore Orioles COO, John Angelos, on the root causes of the unrest
Earlier this week, I published a post titled, Charting the American Oligarchy – How 0.01% of the Population Contributes 42% of All Campaign Cash, which I think is one of the most important articles I’ve written all year. The key point of the piece is that demonizing the 1%, or 3.2 million American citizens, is divisive and counterproductive. Strategically it’s stupid because there will be many decent, intelligent, motivated people within this class who should be recruited as allies rather than demonized with superficial slogans. Moreover, you should never judge anyone based on their wealth and status alone, you should judge each person by their individual actions.
In that post, I highlighted the fact that 25,000 American adults are essentially calling all the public policy shots in the U.S. I went on to argue that the real players are probably the 0.001%, or the 2,500 wealthiest American adults. Even within this extraordinarily wealthy data pool, we still must be careful not to judge them together. Just think about the enlightened commentary made by John Angelos, COO of the Baltimore Orioles and son of the team’s owner, I referenced at the top. The fact that someone of his privilege and wealth understands exactly what is happening in America, and also has the balls to say it, is incredibly encouraging. We must recruit such people to join forces with us rather than alienate them with catchy soundbites.
The good news is that with modern technology we can data-mine the 0.001%, or even the 0.01%, better than ever in order to get a sense of who the really bad players are. Naturally, this would be much harder to do with a pool of several million, but that’s probably unnecessary anyway due to the extreme concentration of wealth and power in America today.
Several organizations are already doing such data mining, and one study that caught my eye yesterday is a joint analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics and the Sunlight Foundation. We should all be indebted to them for doing this, as the revelations and the wealth of information provided serves as an invaluable resource to anyone trying to avert multi-generational oligarch dictatorship.
The analysis focused on 31,796 people, roughly 0.01% of the American population, who collectively contributed $1.18 billion during the 2014 elections, or an estimated 29% of total donations. These donors were mostly male and mostly city dwellers, but most disturbingly, were dominated by Wall Street. Yes, the industry that received trillions in taxpayer backstops and bailouts is not only doing better than ever, but remains in complete and total control of the American political process.
From OpenSecrets.org:
In the 2014 elections, 31,976 donors — equal to roughly one percent of one percent of the total population of the United States — accounted for an astounding $1.18 billion in disclosed political contributions at the federal level. Those big givers — what we have termed the Political One Percent of the One Percent — have a massively outsized impact on federal campaigns.
They’re mostly male, tend to be city-dwellers and often work in finance. Slightly more of them skew Republican than Democratic. A small subset — barely five dozen — earned the (even more) rarefied distinction of giving more than $1 million each. And a minute cluster of three individuals contributed more than $10 million apiece.
Particular attention should be given to the $10 million plus donors, for obvious reasons.
The $1.18 billion they contributed represents 29 percent of all fundraising that political committees disclosed to the Federal Election Commission in 2014. That’s a greater share of the total than in 2012 (25 percent) or in 2010 (21 percent).
That’s one of the main takeaways of the latest edition of the Political One Percent of the One Percent, a joint analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics and the Sunlight Foundation of elite donors in America.
When former Sunlight Fellow Lee Drutman first reported on the One Percent of the One Percent, he noted that these deep pocketed donors were increasingly playing the role of “political gatekeepers.” Candidates needed their backing — and cash — as did the parties and super PACs that depended on the support of the politically active elite.
Now, in the first full midterm since the Supreme Court’s Citizens Uniteddecision, our joint analysis finds that the influence of the One Percent of the One Percent has only continued to grow.
Wall Street maintained its perch as the most influential sector among the One Percent of the One Percent, both in the number of donors that made the list and the money given. Individuals that listed a job in securities spent about $175 million in 2014, of which $107.5 million went to committees supporting Republicans.
The most jarring difference between the One Percent of the One Percent in 2014 and 2010, the last midterm cycle, is how “top heavy” the donor list has become. A small subgroup of these elite donors is the driving force behind its growing share of political money.
In 2010 only 17 individuals contributed a total of $500,000 or more, while members of the $1 million-plus club numbered only nine. In 2014, the number of $500,000 and up donors ballooned to a whopping 135, and 63 people gave more than $1 million.
Those 63 people are the ones that really matters.
The rising numbers of donors who gave at least $500,000 reflects, in part, the sharp uptick in liberal giving to outside spending groups, which can take money in unlimited amounts. In a change from both 2012 and 2010, more than half of the One Percenters’ contributions to outside groups went to those that supported Democrats and attacked Republicans. Liberals have learned to love the super PAC.
Can we finally admit that this is a bipartisan oligarchy?
The donors at the very top of the money pyramid provided the financial fuel for many of the attack ads and other messages from independent organizations that filled the airwaves last year. A previous analysis by CRP found that the country’s top 100 donors accounted for 39 percent of the $696,011,919 raised by super PACs in the 2014 elections.
Compared to the population at large, men are heavily overrepresented among top political donors. We were able to reliably ascertain a gender for about 95 percent of the donors in 2014. Of those, just under 75 percent were men, who accounted for 78 percent of the total contributions, almost exactly the same ratios as in 2012 and 2010.
Among the economic sectors defined by the Center for Responsive Politics, the finance, insurance and real estate category (FIRE) remains the best represented among the One Percent of the One Percent.
Unsurprisingly, these are the industries generally characterized as the most “rent-seeking.”
![]()
The loneliest sector in our analysis? That distinction goes to labor, which accounted for 75 donors and $349,795 in contributions in our .01% data.
Just in case you wondered why real wages haven’t budged in decades. Labor doesn’t pay off the politicians, so it gets scraps, if that.
But that doesn’t mean that Wall Street has shortchanged Democrats: The securities and investment industry had the second-largest representation among individuals in the One Percent of the One Percent who gave to Democrats and liberal outside groups. In fact, the top five industries by party are similar — both also include real estate and miscellaneous finance in the top five. Donors from the oil and gas and manufacturing industries round out that list for Republicans.
Bear that in mind when Hillary disingenuously attacks Wall Street. Like Barry, she doesn’t mean it for a second.
While environmental giving surged among the .01 percent, the largest drop between our 2010 and 2014 lists goes to pro-Israel interests and donors in the insurance industry. In the case of the latter, their contributions surged during consideration of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, in the last midterm cycle.
That is hilarious. They got what they paid for and then moved on.
What about the Vampire Squid itself? Unsurprisingly…
Goldman Sachs, the global investment bank, was the most prolific organization on our 2014 list, with more employees among the One Percent of the One Percent’s list of super donors than any other organization we could identify. The bank is a seasoned player in the Washington influence game. Goldman has kept the top spot on our list for the past three election cycles and was also the number one contributor on Fixed Fortunes 200, Sunlight’s ranking of the top 200 most politically-active companies in the country. Several other financial titans join it in the top 10 including Citigroup and the Blackstone Group investment firm.
Look who else is in there, the biggest financial corporate welfare baby of them all, Citigroup. As is Blackstone, best known for buying up Americans’ foreclosed real estate after the crisis, merely to rent it back to the broke citizenry while behaving like slumlords (see: A Closer Look at the Decrepit World of Wall Street Rental Homes).
Many of the names on the list, of course, are stalwarts who have been among the nation’s top donors in nearly every recent election cycle. Eleven of 2014’s top 20 names were in the top 20 in 2012, and none of the top 20 were new to the .01 percent. Sheldon Adelson and his wife may not have matched his record-setting sum of more than $93 million in contributions in 2012, but in 2014, he alone still threw in $5.8 million. Liberal super donor Tom Steyer gets the award for most dramatic ascent into the topmost tier of the super donors. He gave “only” $115,000 in 2012 (ranking him No. 1,458), before claiming the top spot in 2014 with his $73 million in donations. On the other hand, Oracle founder Larry Ellison went in the opposite direction: He was No. 19 in 2012, with donations of $3.1 million, but only gave $94,300 in 2014.
I’ve focused on the specific danger represented by Sheldon Adelson several times in the past. See:
Sheldon Adelson – The Dangerous American Oligarch Behind Benjamin Netanyahu
Inside the Mind of an Oligarch – Sheldon Adelson Proclaims “I Don’t Like Journalism”
Neo-Con Republicans Make Pilgrimage to Vegas to Kiss the Ring of Oligarch Sheldon Adelson
A review of the top zip codes on our One Percenters list finds much of the money comes from donors who live near population hubs like New York, San Francisco, Chicago and Washington. Of the 50 zip codes that produced the most money from the .01 percent, 14 were in New York, 8 in California and 5 each were in Texas and Illinois.
Also important, is the surge in relevance of super PACs in this oligarch bribe scheme.
The 2010 midterm cycle saw more than $38.6 million of the nearly $732.8 million spent by the One Percent of the One Percent go to outside groups, or about 5 percent of their total contributions. In 2012 contributions to super PACs and hybrid super PACs accounted for about 30 percent of the $1.7 billion contributed, and in 2014, that share inched up again 31.5 percent of this group’s spending, for about $373 million.
Now here’s the best chart of them all:

Our list of the 10 candidates who received the highest percentage of the money from elite donors includes many candidates from wealthy states, and nationally-known candidates like Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, as well as new members who won high-profile races in 2014 like Sens. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, and Tom Cotton, R-Ark.
When I first read the above, I thought, let’s just find out who is most beholden to 0.01% donations and they are probably the most corrupt. Then I saw that Justin Amash is in that category, and I consider him to be one of the few honorable, brave and constitutional members of Congress. This just further proves the dangers of generalization, and the need to really look deep within the data and couple that with the elected representative’s actions.
*This analysis relies on donor ID’s and industry and sector codes researched and assigned by the Center for Responsive Politics. In cases where two donors tied for overall contributions, both donors were included. The number of donors was expanded from previous years to reflect 2014’s larger population.
These figures represent all the political contributions to traditional political action committees, super PACs, party committees and political committees affiliated with federal candidates. In keeping with previous reports in this series we did not include contributions to 527 political organizations that are not registered with the Federal Election Commission. These totals do not include contributions to politically active nonprofit organizations, also known as “dark money” groups, which do not publicly disclose their donors. Note that some totals for the 2010 and 2012 cycles in this analysis differ from what was originally reported; for this study, we used the most recently updated data available.
As if it’s not bad enough, if we include dark money it’s probably far worse. To illustrate just how bad it really is, here’s a great five minute video from Represent.Us



You get what you pay for.
but... but... but... there are blacks angry in the streets and they're not protesting like us white sheep?! those animals!
the 1% have trained the white 99% sooooo well. very obedient, just sit at home like a good serf
The whitebreads should be out looting a rim from Zisser Tire or stealing hair extensions from their neighbors hair stop.
I think everyone has it all wrong. It's not the cash contributions that influence Senators, Congress critters, and the President. It's the little gifts that matter: use of private jets and villas, little boys, underage girls, hoes, dominatrixes, cocaine parties, meth, and the quiet silencing of opposition by any means necessary. That's what really counts.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/nyregion/dean-skelos-new-york-senat...
Psst... Legal corruption in the US meet ISIS:
05.03 23:15 ET BREAKING NEWS: Attempted Islamist Terrorist Attack in Garland, TX (UPDATE-ISIS Claims Responsibility)THEY have US by the short hairs due to one simple thing, Language, the basis of law.
Learn it, crack the code and be free(er) :-)
About language...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTot6Wcz3-g
Vote card people - vote card.
Only ISSUES go on the ballot and it gets voted by the public every three months.
Ballot : Do you want General Electric to receive it's subsidies and only pay 3% taxes YES OR NO ?
Ballot : Do you want the Senate in Washington to TAKE A PENSION CUT DOWN TO THE AVERAGE AMERICAN TICK YES OR NO?
Ballot : Do you want the Federal Reserve? YES or NO?
Ballot : Do you want Income Tax Rates to equal Market Share? As an Example Walmart 60% of market will now pay 60% YES or NO?
Three levels Municipal, State, and Federal. ANYTHING and I mean ANYTHING can be put on it by getting 1% of the riding to sign a petition and it get's put there.
The best part is a Vote-Card transcends all parties, Get the Democrats and the Republicans in on it.
I'm making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do... www.jobs-review.com
shit my nigggg whaaaa only dat seven k niggggawhaaaa i make OVER NINE THOUSAND as a ZH blogger dat advertising revenue what what skrrrrrrrrrrrrr
It sounds like a good idea, but I am not sure. Once you factor in the tendonitus from hand cranking Gerbil Penis's..
Hence, voting doesn't work.
"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun"
The elites have worked very hard to make the equation that... dissent = terrorism.
I doubt they will not apply it. They already do.
No, voting ALONE doesn't work. Democracy and Freedom is NOT for the dumb/uninformed, lazy, scared or disorganized. Tons of totalitarian states offer those options.
And you sound like a typical American, where every complex issue is always reduced to one single variable, to one hero, to one magic bullet. Clearly the MSM and Hollywood have succeeded in dumbing down the populace, if even ZHers think this way.
+1, Kirk
worth repeating: "...every complex issue is always reduced to one single variable, to one hero, to one magic bullet"
as such, reducing complex issue to one single variable is already a side-effect of an electoral system that suggests that one person is enough to represent a constituency
but I disagree with the historical gist of the video and article: corruption is not a new phenomenon, neither in the US nor elsewhere
corruption is a constant byproduct of every political system. the question is always how much. witness the recent Russian and Chinese "wars against corruption"
but also witness the historic record of western republics based on democratic principles, including the US. in fact, corruption at state level was so high, in the US, that it prompted quite strong progressive anti-corruption constitutional amendments like the Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
note here I'm not trying to say anything good about the 17th. I'm pointing at the reasoning of the proponents: that it would help... against corruption
a public reasoning that should help you understand that Americans 1913 felt it was true that state legislatures were corrupt, and expected they could put more trust in a federally directly elected body like the post-1913 US Senate then in the pre-1913 elected State legislatures
so what is the difference between the public understanding of the problems of political corruption 100 years ago and today?
anyway, what is the public understanding successful "movers and shakers" could wish for? and foster, and so increase their hold on political power?
an uninformed, lazy, scared and disorganized electorate, of course. one where the impotent, defeatist call of "elections don't matter" is heard, and nodded to
owned, tools for hire. as old as the profession of prostitution.
so what can i do- not a fucking thing. knowledge has no power anymore, just like my vote, except not voting for a a lying scumbag suite.
ignorance is the power achieved by not trying to change something unchangable...
oh, yea, ask me if i give a shit...
You go to the polls and vote on local issues. For Federal you write in 'None of the fucking above'.
There is no hanging chad, there is no question. You voted and you made a statement at the same time.
If enough of us do this it will be fun to watch how federal elections are justified.
You think they give a fuck? They give us a choice that is not actually a choice, and most believe that it is actually a choice. They don't need to justify it. They just need to buy your complacency.
Marilyn Manson - Sweet Dreams (Lyrics)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CT4gs_Lray4 (4:51)
This just breaking!!! An apparent ISIS attack at a free speech conference in Texas.
That sure was quick.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/05/breaking-islamic-state-partisans...
I only voted u up because u alerted me to the news and linked me.
Not that it's a good thing. Garland is Dallas.
So, following the Zionists' "equality" meme, I desire a be mailed a $10,000,000 check immediately so that I can also be able to shop for and buy my own CONgressman and/or Oval Office puppet.
Failing that, I will invest another $637.23 in fabricating another guillotine.
Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.
"The CONgressman rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again."
''"The guillotine stands as the principal symbol of the Terror in the French Revolution."[131] Invented by a physician during the Revolution as a quicker, more efficient and more distinctive form of execution, the guillotine became a part of popular culture and historic memory. It was celebrated on the left as the people's avenger and cursed as the symbol of the Reign of Terror by the right.[132] Its operation became a popular entertainment that attracted great crowds of spectators. Vendors sold programs listing the names of those scheduled to die.''
Wiki
Watching criminal and treasonous pols, crats, funcs, and banksters go to the guillotine will be a lot more rewarding than watching Honey Boo Boo.
Liberty is a demand. Tyranny is submission.
With that said, I am actually using "guillotine" as a metaphor for trial and Retribution.
..Change you can believe in..
When touching on such themes, Reagan echoed the work, and sometimes the phrasing, of occult scholar Manly P. Hall.
From the dawn of Hall’s career in the early 1920s until his death in 1990, the Los Angeles teacher wrote about America’s “secret destiny.” The United States, in Hall’s view, was a society that had been planned and founded by secret esoteric orders to spread enlightenment and liberty to the world.
In 1928, Hall attained underground fame when, at the remarkably young age of twenty-seven, he published “The Secret Teachings of All Ages,” a massive codex to the mystical and esoteric philosophies of antiquity. Exploring subjects from Native American mythology to Pythagorean mathematics to the geometry of ancient Egypt, this encyclopedia arcanaremains the unparalleled guidebook to ancient symbols and esoteric thought. “The Secret Teachings” won the admiration of figures ranging from General John Pershing to Elvis Presley
Always ask your leaders about this.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE
>spread enlightenment and liberty to the world.
Epic failure on all accounts.
comma of pythagoras
even math's bastardized
Money influences politics.
Water is wet.
Sunshine is bright.
Birds chirp.
My thoughts exactly. But don't worry, there is a candidate for POTUS in 2016 that has promised to get monmey out of politics, AFTER she runs her campaign on foreign monies. You may have heard of her. She bravely dodged sniper fire in BOsnia, was named after a famous mountaineerer, and is a loyal wife to the same man for a long time.
Ready for her?
Grandma Clampett?
Funny how every US presidential candidate has to be vetted by ZWO kingpin Henry Kissinger.
KIssinger is the master of that is evil in the world
"We paid off some folks"
Marco Rubio: 54.84% of funds from the 0.1%
Watch for the pattern here.
I'll check out represent.us
The government is very dangerous and made up of contractors that have no loyalty. Seems like the military would be a problem to any change. But I'll check it out.
Israel's Killer Robots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCAOUlF-nAg (10:57)
Welcome the few faces of The Great Red Dragon (Serpent, "Snakes In Suits") to whom the public insists on continuing to do business with their agents (fronts). Sometimes The Dragon Wins.
Names? Addresses? I must have missed those in the article...
I support campaign finance elimination. Simple solution, pass a law stating that all campaigns will be run on-line only, every candidate gets a government-provided web page they can use to make their case for why we should vote for them, and that is their campaign. Debates can be done via Skype for less than the napkin budget for the average rubber chicken fundraising dinner, then posted online for anyone to watch anytime they like.
Finally, make any and all campaign-related advertising flat-out illegal, with very stiff penalties involving real prison time. That's it, that's really all that needs to be done. It won't be a perfect solution but it would be vastly better than the current corrupt debacle we have in place now.
Seriously "Just in case you wondered why real wages haven’t budged in decades. Labor doesn’t pay off the politicians, so it gets scraps"?
The amount spent by unions promoting favored politicians is huge. It is just excluded by the selection criteria for this table.
Most unions with muscle now are public sector ones. You think they only get "scraps"?
I'd upvote you 100 if able.
I usually like Michael Krieger's work, but the quoted sentence is just flat out nonsense.
That's so cute! You think unions actually spend all that money on politicians so they can take care for their members?
I guess that's why unions support "immigration reform".. So that all of their members can afford cooks and housekeepers.
The best free form of government, that infulence money can buy. And that is how both political parties want it. The electorate? - they are so clueless they expected hope and change in 2008 and now believe they will get it, once Mr Hope and Change is out of office. SUCCERS !!!!!!!!!!!
Couple this: Justin Amash revealed himself when he voted for banker bailouts:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-05/guest-post-congress-sells-out-wall-street-again
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2013/h569
Also not surprising warmonger Ted Cruz, who is ineligible for POTUS but pretends otherwise, made the list. His dad was involved in trying to overthrow Castro, and anyone doing that very likely was working with the CIA.
"Ted Cruz, who is ineligible for POTUS"
He was ineligible the moment his wife went to work for Goldman's Sacks
The above article (and common sense observation of our present situation) makes it pretty clear that our political system is more or less some form of oligarchy. It seems that there is no way to have a truly capitalist economy in such a system. For that matter, even true socialism is impossible since the state hasn't redistributed the wealth completely. It's seems we have some mish-mash of both and it's been severely mutated into some distorted monster that is neither.
So my question is what is the prevailing economic system that results from such a plutocracy? It would seem we never really have had true capitalism in this country. That the wealthiest always were having legislation passed in their favor even before the age of monopoly capitalism and the robber barons. it would also seem that we most certainly have not had any true form of capitalism since.
I also can't see how what we have really even approaches socialism since even though we have many state funded welfare programs. The "state" doesn't really determine where those monies go. Rather it would seem the ruling elite ultimately have a say in which programs get approved and which do not (either directly or indirectly through the funding of politicians).
It's like we have some cluster fuck that has exposed the worst parts of both capitalism and socialism and has left the peasants who still try to work for a living more and more fucked over for doing so.
...there's always an oligarchy my friend. Unless, that is, you somehow thought you're opinion was equivalent to your bosses opinion (do you get it?).
I'm actually asking an honest question. What type of economic system results when you have a plutocracy? It sure as fudge ain't capitalism Anyone?
Dupe
And you don't bite the hand that feeds you...
Please, if anyone can educate me, I have long been confused as to corporate donations....in my experience one was limited to 2k per individual.
How do they make it ok to donate so much? Seriously......they are also seen now as persons, so one should assume same limitations.
But even before that ruling, are there limits?
TIA
2% of the 1% of the 1% are either male or female? hah!
...these aren't the reptilians you are looking for ;-)
The Checkbook Republic.
FUCK YEAH!
This is the LARGEST AND MOST OUTRAGEOUS piece of shit socialist propaganda ever published, and here is why:
60% of government spending is entitlement programs, the political purpose of which is TO BUY VOTES
the 60% of government spending on entitlement programs IS INFINITELY GREATER than the comparative TINY amount of money donated by ALL contributors to ALL political campaigns.
The author is a socialist parasite propagandist.
If you want a "fair and equal system", then first end all entitlement program spending.
Bullshit... best way I can describe your post. It's nothing personal, son.
Stinking pig shit, best way I can describe your post. It's nothing personal, grandpa, I understand that you are one of the entitlement program tit-sucking parasites and have to defend your proletariat vermin government corruption.
While 'entitlement' programs may be a way of buying votes, and while getting rid of much of that spending might lower corruption, it still doesn't fix the problem that the only choices we get to make in terms of who our dear leader will be (and most of those in congress) are people that are 'chosen' for us by the uber-wealthy as shown in the list. Your statement also ignores the fact that these uber-wealthy, in turn for their financial assistance, are able to get legislation passsed that 'entitles' them to make a lot more money and gain even greater spheres of influence on economic policy that benefits them - albeit it may not be as direct a method as an EBT card - but they are entitlement nonetheless.
Whoa, can't believe Mike is this naive about the fact they are all corrupt, either being paid to act or paid to provide "obedient opposition" to maintain the illusion of voting: "Then I saw that Justin Amash is in that category, and I consider him to be one of the few honorable, brave and constitutional members of Congress. This just further proves the dangers of generalization, and the need to really look deep within the data and couple that with the elected representative’s actions."
Believe in you, nothing else matters. And that's the truth my friend.
so now wall street is republican...HA HA HA.... What did Corzine change parties? Did Mahattan...just elect a republican? All those middle states just developed financial centers? So Wall Street is funding the Tea Party? Is this a joke?
All you need to know is Goldman contributes people to move the lever(genslar, Paulson, Dudley, Kashkari.... I won' vote for someone even married to a Goldman employee...Yes that is you Ted Cruz.
This is the root of it and if you think about it as a process over 50 years how would it work - bear in mind the amounts mentioned above are only the *legal* donations?
Shady donor offers campaign donation to a young up and coming politician in exchange for future favors and the politician refuses so the same shady donor offers the same money to the politician's competitor. Over time the shady donors filter out honest politicians except in districts where campaign donations are less critical or individual politiicans who know they're personally safe without the donations for some individual reason.
Political bribes AKA Donations, they are the only thing keeping the US afloat, without them the goodship USSA would have sank a long time ago.
Without Wars to protect the Dollar from being dumped as a Reserve Currency, it would of been dumped ages ago. Wars will continue as long as Private Enterprise make all the Military Toys, and they "Donate" to keep that process alive and recieve more contracts for more toys.
In short: Other people in the World MUST die in order for Umericans to live high on the Hog.
Woodrow Wilson commented after passing the 17'th ammendment - that lobbyist activity had increased markedly.
Before the 17'th, there was little to no lobbyist monetary influence peddling.
Senators were beholden to their states legislature, and hence were under political control.
Really? No one? Ok... so what percent of the top donating .001% are Jews? AND NO, ASKING AS TO THE DISPROPORTIONATE POWER AND INFLUENCE OF A COHERENT 2.5% MINORITY, MANY WITH DUAL LOYALTY TO A SMALL FOREIGN STATE THAT HAS ALREADY WARPED OUR FOREIGN POLICY, IS NOT "ANTISEMITIC" AND THOSE WHO MAKE THAT CLAIM MERELY WISH TO OBFUSCATE AND PRESERVE WILDLY DISPROPORTIONATE POWER.
Can I be arrested for so asking/ saying in the Land of the Free yet?
I expect that day is coming.
Democracy passes into tyranny.
No wonder these traitors have their own Praetorian Guard to protect them.