President Obama and the DNC Accuse Republicans of 'Stealing Democracy'

on October 12, 2010 at 8:54 AM

Jenny EriksonTransparency in politics is good. We the people elect representatives to act in our best interest, and send them off to Washington where we hope they won't let us down.

There are few things more frustrating than watching unpopular bills being passed into law through backroom deals and partisan meetings. When the health care bill was being rammed through Congress, politicians actually laughed at the notion that they might read it, and Nancy Pelosi herself said we had to pass it to find out what was in it.

We still don't know what's in the new health care law, since the rules keep changing.

Americans were told that bailouts were needed to save businesses too large to fail. Billions of dollars have been spent to save jobs and put America back to work. What was in those stimulus projects? Crack monkeys and menopausal yoga and skylights for wine cellars.

Let's not forget about the auto bailouts, the takeover of the student loan industry, or the whole housing mess.

Little by little, our liberal, humanitarian government has been spending us into poverty in the name of the common good. The silent majority has been awoken and is stirring, getting ready to vote out liberty's enemies in November.

What is a spendaholic control freak like President Obama supposed to do in the face of steadily declining approval ratings? A certain scene from The Wizard of Oz comes to mind, in which a little man implores his visitors not to peek behind the curtain.

The DNC released an ad Monday accusing Republicans of using shady tactics and dirty money to get elected. The ad says:

Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie: They're Bush cronies. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce: They're shills for big business. And they're stealing our democracy. Spending millions from secret donors to elect Republicans to do their bidding in Congress. It appears they've even taken secret foreign money to influence our elections. It's incredible: Republicans benefiting from secret foreign money. Tell the Bush crowd and the Chamber of Commerce: Stop stealing our democracy.

This ad comes immediately after attacks from the President himself. Last Thursday, Obama referred to the Chamber of Commerce buying ads against Democrats with foreign money. On Monday, he smeared Karl Rove twice by name at an Illinois rally for Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias.

Do the allegations hold any water? No. Not even The New York Times can agree with the President on this one. The highly liberal paper states:

But a closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, according to both liberal and conservative election-law lawyers and campaign finance documents.

The notion that it's Republicans stealing our democracy instead of Leftists like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi is laughable at best. It wasn't the right pushing bailouts and corporate takeovers and socialized health care.

Besides, President Obama and the DNC should be very careful what they wish for. I seem to remember a certain presidential candidate refusing to disclose where all of his campaign contributions originated. Maybe Democrats should get the log out of their own eye before they go looking for splinters in Karl Rove's eye.

Image via Tech Askew

Filed Under: barack obama, corporations, economy, human rights, in the news, media, politics, tea party

Like What You Just Read?

Click the "Like" button below to get Jenny Erikson's stories on Facebook.

Comments (10)

vmh127

on Oct 12, 2010 at 9:41 AM

Great posting!!! We need more truths like these revealed by the media!

Report this comment

PunditMom

on Oct 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM

There is "little evidence" because the Chamber won't release any information about its funding. The Citizens United case said that Congress has the authority to pass a law requiring those who fund political ads, like the Chamber, to disclose who they get their money from. The Chamber won't be forthcoming until it's forced to by law -- if they had nothing to hide, they'de be doing it right now to stop the stories.

Nonmember comment from spongekill

on Oct 12, 2010 at 12:34 PM

"Corporate takeover" is exactly what the GOP wants when they talk about smaller government. Smaller government sounds great, but in practical terms it only means less safeguards to stop ballooning corporations from taking over every aspect of your life, and comparing their interest in providing for your well-being against their bottom line. Look at the financial collapse: direct result of an industry free of regulation. Look at health care: our health care is a JOKE to the entire world, because it's (a) bad and (b) horrendously expensive, since private companies run it and base prices off of how much they can make off you, not how affordable they can make their services for people who need it. The GOP sells this to the public as "freedom" from government, which as a concept is inherently appealing to us individualist-minded Americans, but in reality, in the present day, only means subjugation to corporate interests. People need to see past the carefully-designed populist appeal of the Republican PR machine and really understand what their policies mean for the US in the long term - or just think about any of the myriad times in the past decade the private sector has proven itself incapable of self-regulation, thus negating the entire basis for the GOP platform.

Nonmember comment from Rocin

on Oct 12, 2010 at 3:16 PM

Well, the usual "progressive" talking points; big business = evil, big government = good, (yawn). I'll take my chances with big business, 'cause if I don't like their product, I don't have to deal with them; not true of big government!

on Oct 12, 2010 at 4:11 PM

I didn't say anything about good vs evil, but simply what was actual to the benefit of the country and what was not. My point had more to do with the inherent contradictions between the GOP's media presence and their actual platform, and the misinformation they employ to sell this platform to the American people. That aside, the irony is that when big business screws up, it's the anti-government people who are first in line screaming for the government to do something.

on Oct 12, 2010 at 5:12 PM

Haha, funny! We'll have to agree to disagree on that, Sponge! I don't see "anti-government people" screaming for government intervention; I see "big government people" screaming for intervention!

someluckydog

on Oct 14, 2010 at 1:51 AM

Let's look back at who it was that refused to support the Healthcare Bill as written...the US Chamber of Commerce. Oops, guess if you don't support the liberal agenda they'll try to get you later! Perhaps the US Chamber of Commerce will release their full donor list when SEIU and the Obama campaign release theirs.

on Oct 14, 2010 at 1:54 AM

Part 1

Spongekill...you stated that our health care is "(a) bad". Why is it that my Canadian friends come to the US for health care they can't obtain in Canada and why do others from all around the world come to the US for heart surgery, cancer care, etc.??? Because we have the best care in the world, that's why! Our free market system encourages companies to research and develop new drugs and procedures. In a government controlled system there is no incentive to innovate.

on Oct 14, 2010 at 1:56 AM

Part 2

Yes, it is horrendously expensive. We are paying medical bills for a family member who is uninsured, so I know! The reason it is so expensive is because medical personnel and pharmaceutical companies must insure themselves against ridiculous, unjustified malpractice awards. The reason many people and employers can't afford health insurance is because federal law does not allow them to insure across state lines. There are over 1500 health insurance companies, but residents in some states have less than a handful to chose from. The lack of competition allows them to charge exorbitant rates. In a free market you would be able to shop anywhere in the country for your insurance (just like you do for auto or life insurance, etc.) and the cost would come down as companies compete for your business. No one in the country needs to go without health care. The big, bad drug company that makes one of the drugs my family member needs just agreed to provide the drug for free to the tune of $500 per month for up to one year (yes, that $6000 worth), one of the doctor's she sees monthly agreed to reduce the office visit from $180 to $48, our local doctor gives her a 20% reduction, the hospital labs gives her 50% off if paid within 30 days. All of this is based on her income and having no insurance...you ask, they will work with you. My son is in the same situation and has had 3 surgeries at reduced rates because he needed care and doesn't have insurance.

on Oct 14, 2010 at 1:57 AM

Part 3, the end :)

Competition and compassion are what we need, not another huge government bureaucracy telling us how to run our lives and what care we need or should have. Government and government programs are not the answer.