Sarah Silverman's Raunchy Proposal for Mega-Rich Romney Supporter Makes Valid Point (VIDEO)

by Maressa Brown July 17, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Sarah Silverman is no stranger to lending her voice to presidential campaigns -- remember 2008's "The Great Schlep"? -- so it's not exactly a shocker that she's baaack with choice words about the 2012 election. This time, she's addressing presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney's mega-rich supporter, Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson.

If you hadn't heard by now, 78-year-old Adelson is vehemently anti-Obama and has pledged Romney $100 million of his billions to help him beat the President this fall. Fair? No. Legal? Yes. And also hugely damaging to our democracy. Think about it -- Adelson basically wants to purchase the presidency for Mitt Romney! Even if you're a Mitt supporter, you have to admit -- that's not cool. So, looking to make a very bold statement about campaign finance reform, Sarah has made an, err, indecent proposal for Adelson, in the form of a very NSFW, R-rated video ...

Check it out, but warning: explicit, very adult vulgarity abounds!

Ha! I'll admit -- if you don't know Sarah Silverman's ribald sense of humor, then this probably left you confused or disgusted or both. But what you've gotta understand is that she's trying to appal us -- for our own good! Because what's going on here between Sheldon and Mitt is as obscene as what she's proposing here. Worse, actually, when you think about how special interest money has already poisoned our politics, and Adelson's vow is on a completely new level of evil.

Sarah's video actually premiered with some ironic timing: The latest effort to create real campaign financing reform, the DISCLOSE Act -- which would require disclosure of the names of political contributors, including corporations, and the amounts they give to each campaign -- was just thrown out the window by Republicans in the Senate. President Obama's response?

Two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United that big corporations are allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence American elections. They can buy millions of dollars worth of TV ads with no obligation to reveal who’s actually paying for them. ... If we allow this practice to continue, special interests will have unprecedented influence over politicians. It's wrong. It's corrosive to our democracy, and it's a threat to our future.

Scary, huh? To feel like the real power on Capitol Hill lies with special interests, men like Sheldon Adelson? Do you really think they're considering the best interests of regular Americans like you and me ... or how they can further line their brimming pockets? Considering the culprits behind the bust of 2008, I think we all know the answer to that question. And that's just one of the many reasons we should stand with Sarah Silverman to "cut Mitt Romney free from his sugar daddy."

What do you think of Sarah's proposal? Do you believe we need serious campaign finance reform?

Image via SchlepLabs/YouTube

Add Comment 15

Like What You Just Read?

Click "Like" for more on issues that are important to moms.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Maressa Brown

has enjoyed reporting and writing for a variety of entertainment and women's magazines and websites. More often than not, you'll find her blogging, hitting the gym, reading, researching something on her iPhone, laughing, chatting at an above-"normal" volume, or getting her caffeine fix.

Extra Sugar

Add Comment

Comments 15

billsfan1104

July 17, 2012 at 11:37 AM

Liberals have unions and George Soros. So if you say the democrats are not benefiting from this, then you have issues.
As for Sarah Silverman, her comedy is vile. Funny how its double standards for you liberals. Because if a conservative comedian that did this to the Obamas, you would have a shit fit.

Report this comment

KWnavywife

July 17, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Oh gimme a break. How do you think Obama got elected? People donating mega bucks, thats how. Hello?

Report this comment

JiggyOz

July 17, 2012 at 11:50 AM

I agree with you, and I am a diehard Republican. That being said, I will suppose you are equally vehemently opposed to Obama's fundraising techniques? Dinners costing tens of thousands of dollars that only elites may attend? A bridal-type registry (Google it)? Fundraising in foreign countries? Politics has gotten ridiculous and honestly, unAmerican, when it costs millions of dollars to run for any high position of governance.

Report this comment

Smerkalot

July 17, 2012 at 11:58 AM

I generally like Sarah Silverman... but have to agree with what the three above posters have said.

Report this comment

KellyBSchrute

July 17, 2012 at 12:03 PM

I knew this day might come, Maressa. I actually agree with you. Hold on one second while I slap myself... Ok, I'm back.

I believe campaign financing is one of the forces eroding our democracy. Political offices shouldn't be bought. However, it's not the fault of either of the current candidates that this is how it works right now. I don't blame either of them for taking what they can get.

The problem with campaign finance reform is getting the politicians themselves to agree to it. If you have a pro-reform candidate, he/she still needs to get elected first, and will end up needing financing. It's a catch 22---a tragic one.

Report this comment

Nonmember comment from ally

July 17, 2012 at 12:36 PM

It is easy to know what God thinks of money. Just look at the people he gives it to.

Report this comment

JAFE

July 17, 2012 at 12:44 PM

She's a very vulgar woman. I won't even listen to that clip. Then I'll say what's fair for one is fair for all. Wasn't it Obama who raffled a dinner with Clooney??? Doesn't he also have the Martha's Vineyard people? Puleeze!

Report this comment

Nonmember comment from American Expat

July 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I've been saying it for a long time, the best way to defeat influence peddling is not vote for those getting the money. Seriously! Not only DC but most state governments are a mess, it is impossible to elect anyone who COULD do worse! Personally I'd love to do an in-his-face to the china deal making adelson when, after all the money he spent, a lesser known republican candidate and not Romney gets elected! See, until the day comes when unions and corporations are allowed monitor our votes and punish those who don't vote the right person, we still have the final vote. And, when candidates who get elected see the didn't need special interest money, they'll be much more beholden to their constituents and not contributors. Cause if they aren't, the next person gets their job. And also, don't support the organizations that peddle influence, laws exist already for union members to not have their dues go to campaigns, and don't patronize businesses who give to campaigns. Half the reason we can't get entitlement reforms are because of big businesses that benefit from recipient spending! I know I'm not spending any of my large entertainment budget at Adelson casinos anymore!

Of course this is all wishful thinking, I know most voters can't help but only vote who they see most on TV of their particular political party.

Report this comment

Nonmember comment from Guest

July 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM

BTW, there was a time when I would have agreed with that disclosure proposal. However, recently the liberals have started harassing and threatening Republican donors. I think someone should be able to make a political contribution without fear of left wing "brown shirt" reprisals.

Report this comment