Biderman On The Constitution And 'Special Interest' Democracy

Tyler Durden's picture

As politicians have become more and addicted to the campaign contributions of 'special interest' groups, or as Charles Biderman of TrimTabs analogizes: "The pusher owns the user", so the representatives-of-the-people are no longer. The only solution Charles sees is to change our representative form of government as we "no longer have a government of the people, for the people, by the people". In a July-4th-week inspired rant, Biderman extends from the Gettysburg address to constitutional expectations (and representative law-driven rule as opposed to military force) concluding what many know and yet are afraid to lean against: our government is "of the special interest groups, for the special interest groups, and by the special interest groups".


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tom Green Swedish's picture

Buy Gold with your Fiat. At only $460 an ounce to mine, $1600 an ounce is a bargain.

idea_hamster's picture

 "of the special interest groups, for the special interest groups, and by the special interest groups"

I think it was always this way -- but when they wrote "of the people," only the wealthy, land-owning, white men were considered "people."  Who government serves has not changed.

Azannoth's picture

And if only it remaind like that! Landowning white male voters are the only people you can trust with serious decision making(I guess I would include their wives too if I was pushed)

But your arguments is exactly RIGHT, the form of government did NOT change the voters did.

Fukushima Sam's picture

Corporatism and imperialism are like bread and butter.

idea_hamster's picture

Corporatism and imperialism are like bread and butter.

Eventually, they fall on the floor, and somehow always land in a way that makes the biggest mess?

Mitzibitzi's picture

Yup. And if you combine them, the bread will always land butter side down.

veyron's picture

Biderman how's your FB call?

Stackers's picture

It's easy Chuck, 12 year term limits for any combination of Federal office.

2 terms as Senator and you are done. 6 terms as Congressman, or 3 terms as Congressman and 1 as a Senator.

Presidential terms are included in this maximum as well. The problem is the corruption inherent in a "career politician"

It's time to outlaw that particular life long career. You get 12 years and you're out.

redpill's picture

I don't see how term limits will fix corruption, if anything it will prompt some to be more corrupt so that they get as many favors done for their buddies before they are termed out and then collect the reward in other ways. Even when career politicians get voted out of office and can't collect their reward in the form of campaign contributions, they still get it in the form of a cushy position at a law or lobbying firm.

I think what Biderman is suggesting here is something closer to direct democracy, but the problem with that is the electorate tends to be stupid, ignorant, and apathetic. California has a solid history of terrible ballot measures passing with the direct proposition system. Wrap something up in a proposition that purports to "help our children" or "save the environment" and the dumbfucks will vote for it no matter how poorly written or fiscally disastrous it is. Still I do think having some direct democracy potential on the federal level would be a good thing. But Congress would never agree to that because it cuts them out of their profit loop, and it would take an amendment to the Constitution to make it happen. So while the whole conversation might be an interesting intellectual exercise, the reality is that we're stuck with what we have because the people in power don't want to change it.

CH1's picture

I don't see how term limits will fix corruption

Quite right. It's a cosmetic change to one corner of a monstrous beast.

The only effective thing to do is to get away from the beast.

"Going Galt," "dropping out," agorism," or whatever you wish to call it... stop feeding the beast is the only serious choice.

12ToothAssassin's picture

Thanks Captain 'Biderman' Obvious, dont you have a city to saver?

FEDbuster's picture

Been trying to get "Tyler" to post this clip of Max Keiser at some "post collapse" Euro SPIEF 2012 semminar, but to no avail.  For you that enjoy Max, this is a classic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KpfEXMWWJA

indygo55's picture

I thought he answered that question last week. It's up.

 

veyron's picture

His cost basis is 42 ...

Debt-Is-Not-Money's picture

"But your arguments is exactly RIGHT, the form of government did NOT change the voters did."

Respectfully, the form of government DID change but it wasn't "we the people" that changed. 99 years ago, the Congress assigned what it is obligated to do under the Constitution (issuance and control of our money) to a private international cartel. This was an unconstitutional act. The Federal Reserve, fraudulent in name, does not issue money, they issue debt based currency, the opposite of money. The passage of the 16th and 17th amendments, the 16th to collect the interest for the FRN's, the 17th to remove control of federal government spending by the states, was a coup d'etat of the United States.

There is salvation here, but it is not widely recognized: neither the 16th nor the 17th amendments were constitutionally ratified. The states should declare them null, void and of no effect. The state legislators would once again APPOINT their United States Senators to go to D.C. to represent the interest of the states. This action would de-fang, kill and bury all lobbyists foreign and domestic as they would have to "work over" each state capitol. A Presidential Decision Directive followed by an Executive Order to declare the Federal Reserve and the 16th amendment unconstitutional, a cancellation of ALL interest owed to the Federal Reserve and the immediate conversion of all FRN's to US Notes (interest free real money) would return the U.S. to our Representative Republic.

All it would take to do this is brains and balls.

Oh well, I can dream can't I?

Cathartes Aura's picture

you're hilarious!

Landowning white male voters are the only people you can trust with serious decision making(I guess I would include their wives too if I was pushed)

"landowning white males" are pretty much the Wall Street demographic, the majority in .gov, the majority in "police enforcement," the majority in the mercenary corps, the majority in the banking class. . .

and they very often use their wives in order to set up tax haven loopholes to hide their ill-gotten payouts.

dude, find an open mike comedy club - you'll slay!

Nick Jihad's picture

Who government serves has not changed.

Not true. The biggest special interest is women, and unlike all the other special interests, women comprise a solid majority of the electorate. They judge all laws, programs and policy according to whether it helps or hurts women. Add up the numbers, and it will be clear who government now serves - women.


monad's picture

The biggest special interest is the US MIC, of which thanks to GHB & Darth Cheney, the City of London is the majority shareholder. #2 is the banskter special interest. Blame women for this mess? Wow.

Cathartes Aura's picture

some days the bitter runs hard and thick here. . .

Monedas's picture

A can of Coke cost $ .10 to make, the promotion and distribution cost $ .30 and the multiple layers of tax and government interference cost $ .50 ! The profit is $ .10 !                 So, the manipulators are keeping gold over priced  ....  or the manipulators with a social conscience are trying to dissuade the innocent from throwing their fiat away on a scam by price discovery of Gold's high price ?  Have it your way !       Monedas      1929        Comedy Jihad Joke Discovery Mechanism

aerojet's picture

How does buying up gold solve the problem of special interests capturing government?

Everyone is hiring lobbyists now.  They don't bother to compete or worry about competition, it's all about what they can get out of government.  The US is a way down the road to collectivism, really--there's no major industry you can go into and find a real market, it is all somehow either subsidized or does business with Uncle Sam.  You would think maybe Wal-Mart, but no--Wal Mart is making a killing because of welfare and unemployment monies.  Grocery?  EBT.  Farming?  Major outright subsidies there.  All healthcare, insurance, and education industries.  Everything.  We have created a gigantic monster with a single point of failure that is now massively misallocating capital.  It is the USSR all over again.

GeneMarchbanks's picture

 

"The pusher owns the user"

Holy cow that's an astute observation. Who could've seen that coming?

HoofHearted's picture

Time to get long pitchforks, torches, tar, and feathers. Probably would need to be long lead plus high speed delivery devices. The time has come for all good men to come to the aid of their country...as it once was and needs to be once again.

Cathartes Aura's picture

never gonna happen, been reading the same words, here, for years now.

as long as people still use the TBTF banks, still pay taxes, still conduct "business as  usual" while simultaneously bitching about "the sheeple" or the "dirty hippies" that are actually protesting,

then the illusion of nationstate continues, and those who pull the strings do so in comfort.

midgetrannyporn's picture

As some famous money-loving joo once opined: There is nothing new under the sun...

Toolshed's picture

Your anti-semetic shit is getting tiresome. You need to diversify your hate. Loser.

Monedas's picture

If a Joo makes a nickle selling you a candy bar .... he's greedy !       If a welfare recipient gets a $1 it's social justice ? The cheapest tithers for charity are "Welfare Niggers" (of all races) and wealthy Afro-Americans who've made it big with Capitalism and liberals like John Kerry (who served in Viet Nam and was awarded a Purple Heart for a wound in his ass caused by a grain of rice assuming the role of shrapnel) and Algore !       Monedas      1929         Unofficial Spokeshole For All Joodom And Children Of Abraham

crawldaddy's picture

I like this guy.

crawldaddy's picture

stop using words you dont understand.  Go back to listening to your college dropout, friendless, know nothing drug addict radio host and feed on some more stupidity.

i-dog's picture

What fucking nonsense ... from equating the European Union with the Articles of Confederation (nothing could be further from the truth!) ... to quoting Lincoln as an example of pursuing the wishes of the people! Sheeeeesh!!!

And his teleprompter reading is becoming more painful to listen to than Obomber's....

Dr. Richard Head's picture

While I am not familiar with the works of Ambrose Bierce, I do think his statement of, "An election is nothing more than the advanced auction of stolen goods" fits pretty well into this TrimTabs video.

i-dog's picture

His observation that corruption is rife is something that even 5-year olds understand right now. But his solution? ... ummm ... let's get rid of representative government and .... ummmm .... errrrrr .... let's errrr .... come up with something else .... errrr, like .....

If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd theorise that this is a propaganda piece to get the sheep baaahhhing appreciatively when the election gets cancelled!!

Dr. Richard Head's picture

Tis possible, but there are many people still believing this party or that party and things will be so much better.  The first step in solving any problem is to identify it. 

GernB's picture

The idea that people need protection from the unchecked power of democracy is not new. It dates back to the origin of the country. Too many people confuse democracy with the freedom, they are opposites. The majority, invested with unlimited power, is far more dangerous than the average individual invested with the same power, because the majority has a strong tendency to justify what benefits them the most as being what is right, fair and just, even when it harms or even kills others.

We don't need to do away with democracy, we need to begin to respect the individual and restore protection for them from a majority that will sell it's children into debt slavery so it can continue to spend on things it has conned itself into believing it is entitled to.

aerojet's picture

What is going on is NOT un-checked democracy!  Far from it.  It is the purchase of access.

Roger Knights's picture

Actually, it was Mencken who said that. Here's the full quote:

 

"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office.Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get, and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time it is made good by looting 'A' to satisfy 'B'. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advanced auction on stolen goods."
Dr. Richard Head's picture

Much thanks.  Looks like I am heading to the book store for some Mencken.

pods's picture

Mencken is great.  Shoots straight!

No need to head to the book store though Doc:

http://www.prismnet.com/gibbonsb/mencken/

pods

aerojet's picture

And that's exactly why I don't bother to vote.  I already know I'm one of the sheep led to slaughter.

PulpCutter's picture

WallSt broke it's historical pattern, and gave to Obama, more than the GOP, in 2008.  Chalk that up to a really disastrous Bush administration.

This time around, however, WallSt has reverted to it's historical pattern, and back to donating 5X as much to the GOP.

GernB's picture

People forget that Obama broke the pattern of volentary participation in compaign finance reform. McCan could not do the same because the campaign reform bill had his name on it. Obama's punishment for choosing to avoid the restraints was being elected. His legacy is that no future candidate will choose to limit their contributions because the public has proven that when push comes to shove they don't care about campaign reform.

PulpCutter's picture

More GOP half-truths.  McCain was "limiting contributions" in name only.  He was gaming the system, endrunning it (by a factor of 10) with PAC money.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/us/politics/20obamacnd.html

PulpCutter's picture

Absolutely.  Some real special interests: Goldman-Sachs, JPM, Exxon, the AMA, CitiGroup, HCA Healthcare, BP, etc..

LawsofPhysics's picture

No shit sherlock, about 50 years too late.