Links
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(141)
-
▼
May 2007
(20)
- A hybrid today keeps global warming away
- Lucas Oil Stadium
- Chavez: Just another thug
- Straws in the wind - the "shh, don't mention the H...
- Torture
- An Inconvenient Graph
- Big Brother (the show) meets Big Brother (government)
- Another One Bites the Dust
- Cool Sunday in May: Global Warming's a'comin'
- To Z or not to Z
- Jerry Falwell, RIP
- Book Review
- Christianity Debated
- Giuliani and abortion
- Change in France?
- Signs of the Times
- Hatemonger's Quarterly
- Warning: More Global Warming Skepticism Ahead!
- Ave Atque Vale
- Legalese, Spin Doctoring, and Moral Sensitivity
-
▼
May 2007
(20)
Labels
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
I've already stated that I am not a supporter of Rudy Giuliani, but as of yet, I haven't really mentioned John McCain. So it was timely that Dennis Prager's column today deals with just that person. Prager routinely mentions on his radio program that he will not vote for McCain because of McCain's support for campaign finance reform, but rarely elaborates about why the reform was bad. But in his piece today, Prager does just that. Coupling this campaign finance reform business with his support this week of the immigration reform and his past involvement in the Gang of 14 debacle, McCain is obviously not fit to be President. He cares not for what his constituents think, is a bit of a jerk behind closed doors, and couches all of his most idiotic positions in terms like "bi-partisanship" and "crossing the aisle." Basically, he does whatever is good for John McCain and John McCain only. Say what you will about John Kerry, but the guy at least had some principles (even if they were immoral) that were not for sale. McCain will sell any of his positions if it is politically expedient.
The primary consequence of most campaign finance reform has been to ensure that more and more extraordinarily rich people run for office.The one weakness in my eyes in Fred Thompson's political resume is his support of this same campaign finance reform. Here's hoping he has seen the error in his ways and will readily admit it when asked.
...
By prohibiting a billionaire from giving more than $2,000 to anyone else's campaign but his own, campaign finance reform has ensured that with few exceptions, only the super rich will run for office in races that demand great expenditures of money.
...
A few years ago, I considered running for the Senate seat held by Barbara Boxer. Ultimately I decided against it for family reasons and because I thought that having a national radio show enabled me to influence more people than even a Senate seat from California would. But what rendered running untenable was the campaign finance reform ban on individuals giving candidates more than $2,000.
Since no one can run in a California statewide election with less than $40 million and since I have no personal wealth, I would have had to raise tens of millions of dollars from tens of thousands of individuals. My life would have consisted almost solely of asking people for money. I had supporters who could have personally given me millions of dollars, but they are barred from doing so. Wealthy people can only spend such money on themselves, no matter how ill-suited they may be for public office.
That is what campaign finance reform has achieved -- discouraging, if not actually eliminating, non-wealthy Americans from running for office and forcing those who do run to devote their lives to asking for money; while at the same time pushing more and more extremely wealthy incompetents into office.
And I haven't even mentioned campaign finance reform's undermining of elementary freedoms. Who is the government to tell an American whom he can give his money to? So long as the giving is completely transparent -- i.e., the public knows exactly who has given any candidate money and exactly how much -- people should be allowed to spend as much on another person as on themselves.
...
That is how damaging campaign finance reform has been to American democracy. And that is why John McCain ... cannot now get my vote. Which is quite something considering that I voted for him against a governor from Texas in the 2000 California presidential primary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment