WASHINGTON, November 11, 2014 — The scolds in the mainstream media fear and hate “dark money.” The term is meant to conjure sinister connotations of free people putting their money where their political speech is. Though secret financial support to political action committees (PACs) comes from both the left and right, the mainstream media’s chief complaint — especially after the midterm elections — is that the most effective funding comes from well-heeled donors on the right.
“The next Senate was just elected on the greatest wave of secret, special-interest money ever raised in a congressional election,” said the New York Times’ lead editorial after the Democratic Party’s shellacking last week. “What are the chances that it will take action to reduce the influence of money in politics?” asked the Times.
For her part, the Washington Post’s Matea Gold complains, “Democrats and their allies made the topic [dark money] one of their central lines of attack this year, featuring the billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch in nearly 100 different political spots that ran in states from Alaska to Florida. But the issue failed to gain traction, and most of those Democrats lost.”
If the new Republican-controlled Senate obeys the Constitution’s First Amendment and the high court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling, the chances they will pursue stifling the most effective counter to the media’s pro-Democrat propaganda machine should be zero.
And the reason is simple: Conservative political action committees are a thousand times better at messaging than are the flat-lining, imagination-bereft, empty suits of the GOP’s leadership.
Missing from the money-in-politics debate is the most obvious and never asked questions: Why does the national debt stand at more than $17 trillion?; why does the Congress raise the nation’s debt ceiling?; why is the Obama administration proposing a reduction in U.S. military forces to pre-World War II levels?; at a time when working families are struggling through the worst economic depression since the 1930s, why did Democrats enact an authoritarian and expensive government-run health care program?
The answer is simple: To buy votes with your tax dollars and those borrowed from totalitarian China.
President Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress passed nearly $1 trillion in stimulus spending in 2009. While no one talks about it today, the obvious purpose of the massive federal expenditure was to grease the palms of favored constituencies ahead of his 2012 re-election campaign. Obama bought his return to office with tax dollars ripped from your bank accounts by his targeting IRS.
Dark money shined light on the damage totalitarian Obamacare is doing to Americans and a medical system once the envy of the world. It highlighted the lie that says U.S. unemployment is down while millions remain out of work, are reduced to working part-time, or have simply given up. It showed that the “dreams” of millions of foreign invaders now overburdening the nation’s welfare state entitlement programs, depressing wages through their cheap labor, introducing disease, and subverting our electoral system are an Obama administration obsession that is destructive to America.
In short, dark money took the conservative message over the heads of Democratic politicians and their echo chamber in the mainstream media. And it cost a lot less than it costs government to buy votes.
According to Opensecrets.org, Senate Majority PAC, “a super PAC closely affiliated with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid,” spent $47.5 million in support of Democratic Senate candidates. The Koch brothers Freedom Partners Action Fund, on the other hand, spent a paltry $21.6 million in ads attacking said Democrats in 2014.
It’s painfully obvious that conservative “dark money” is not the problem in American politics. The problem, at least for Democrats, is that a more cost effective conservative-libertarian message cuts through the feeble propaganda produced by the 24/7 government-media complex.Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Communities Digital News
• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.