Skip to main content

Money swirling into a black hole
Republican campaign funds
The big Republican donors tend not to be the social warfare types, rather they tend to be the obscenely wealthy who are obscenely worried about having to pay more taxes. Because even though they have more money than they and future generations of their most dissolute progeny would be able to spend on even their most lavishly ostentatious excesses, they don't want to have to contribute in any way to making life easier for the poor, the hungry, the homeless, and the otherwise disadvantaged.

It's the kind of people they are. Low, petty, small and mean. So in order not to have to pay more taxes, in order to prevent anyone from making them contribute to a more just and fair society, they give hundreds of millions of dollars to failed right wing political hacks such as Karl Rove, who piss those hundreds of millions away, with nothing to show for it. They might as well be doing lots and lots of really really expensive drugs.

So, as a result of this year's elections, these big money Republican donors will have to keep paying taxes, hopefully they soon will have to pay even more taxes, and they also pissed away hundreds of millions of their own fortunes to no purpose at all. You'd think they'd want to save their money, next time. They might not have a choice about taxes, but they do have a choice about continuing to throw good money after bad. If they care so much about preserving every penny of their staggering wealth, perhaps they ought to consider not wasting it.

Originally posted to Laurence Lewis on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:09 PM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  If they had simply saved their money. . . (10+ / 0-)

    They would more than come out ahead in the extra taxes they paid.  We are talking 4% raise.

    Just goes to show that being rich does not equate to being savy.

    Blessed are the peacemakers, the poor, the meek and the sick. Message to Repug Fundies: "DO you really wonder "what would Jesus do?" I didn't think so.

    by 4CasandChlo on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:12:30 PM PST

    •  I've thought the same thing.. (7+ / 0-)

      I suspect many of them are consumed by anger that they "the makers" would have to pay taxes that go in part to "the takers."

      As a member of Courtesy Kos, I am dedicated to civility and respect for all kossacks, regardless of their opinions, affiliations, or cliques.

      by joedemocrat on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:17:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  According to Romney even he has no idea (4+ / 0-)

        what his effective rate actually is in any given year. So what would a few extra percentage points really mean to these people? Truth is most of them would never even notice. Never mind the actual good that it would go toward...or the sense of fairness it would bring after a decade of record low taxes on them.

        •  With these kabillionaires (0+ / 0-)

          it's not a matter of need, but greed.

          I believe that there is something fundamentally fucked up with their psyche that causes them lie, cheat, steal, pollute and indirectly kill to make or save one more dollar without even the trace of a conscience.

    •  I wonder if they paid more in failing (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eviemarie, fumie

      political donations per rich person than they would have to pay in taxes.

      Patriotism may be the last refuge of scoundrels, but religion is assuredly the first.

      by StrayCat on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:56:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It Won't Cost Them Anything (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gustogirl

        Remember that Obama wants to LOWER corporate tax rates that he thinks are "too high" so all that will happen is that accountants for the top 1% will shift their pay slightly from cash (on which they MIGHT have to pay an extra 3% in taxes) to dividends or stock or other forms of long-term capital gains on which they only pay 15%.

        Or, they keep the money in the corporation, and pay lower taxes on that. Either way the rich will find tax loopholes. Their overall taxes WON'T go up.

        We'll be stuck with less Medicare and Medicaid, and Social Security cost of living adjustments because of "shared sacrifice" and they will have some cosmetic rearranging of "tax loopholes" and some minor adjustment to top marginal rates that will in the end mean nothing for the rich.

        And we're supposed to be happy with that deal?

        I say NO WAY IN HELL! We'd all better start bombarding our representatives now! NO deal that cuts ONE PENNY from social security, medicare or medicaid.

        In fact, no spending cuts other than military should be made at all.

    •  James Carville paraphrased Winston Churchill (7+ / 0-)

      On Bill Mayer's show Friday - "Never has so much been spent by so few to accomplish so little."

      Got a big laugh.

      Mrick

      •  I hope this means we won't be seeing Rove much (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ssgbryan

        To be frank, looking at Karl Rove's smug face, growing increasingly fat and self-satisfied, is no fun.

        For me the best outcome from this election would be for Rove to be recognized as a conman, who has been taking tens of millions of dollars in fees, for services that have been counter-productive.

        A bold claim?  Think of those long lines waiting to vote.  Think they went out there for fun?  No, they went out there because the GOP (Generally Old Pills) Party had been so obvious about wanting to steal the vote by making it hard/impossible for many voters to cast their votes.  An accident?  Nope, a very well-planned conspiracy, that in many other countries would be grounds for an indictment of a horde of Rove's homies under a RICO action.

        When are we going to hold these bastards accountable for their crimes?  When Hell freezes over?  This is OUR democracy, OUR nation, OUR rights they tried to steal.

        Fuck 'em.  Never again.

        If trying to cast a fraudulent vote can get you up to two years in jail, what should the penalty be for trying to prevent fifty thousand people from being able to vote?  

        A pat on the back?  A stern lecture?  Getting a finger shaken at them?

    •  If they can afford to lose this much money they (5+ / 0-)

      can afford to pay higher taxes.  It is just that simple.

      Sure, their pissed away millions created jobs in media and communications and PR, but still.  Paying taxes creates jobs too--in education, health care, construction, public works, research.  Much more socially productive than 30 sec  ads.  Soak the rich and spare our ears and eyes.

      The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

      by Mimikatz on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:38:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Money is power (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sacrelicious

      Once they get past financial security, however they define it, everything else is either score keeping or a way to get and hold more and more power.

      Assume 2-3 Billion was spent on this year's election. That would have been enough to fund 3,000 start-up companies with a million each which would have led to additional financials. Assume a 100 jobs each and there would have been an immediate impact of 300,000 jobs. If 1% became mid-size companies are big, it could easily been seed capital for a million + jobs in 5-10 years.

      This election showed me , more than anything else, how the horded wealth of the .oo1% is wasted . Literally pissed on the ground.

    •  The money is worthless unless spent. (0+ / 0-)

      We should be grateful they spent a billion on political propaganda and that the majority of the voters were not deceived, as they were in 2010.
      The question we need to ask is how come so many people who accumulate lots of money are apparently antagonistic towards their fellow man and out to deceive and distress. And the answer might well be that the accumulation is obsessive and a sign of an ungenerous person, to begin with, whose main interst lies in accumulation to the point of depriving others of their rights.
      Deprivators are people who deprive others, not because they want what they are after taking, but because they want to deprive and inflict the "less than lethal" injury that causes. We should consider that they are sadists who have discovered how to torture indirectly and avoid being held to account for their unjustified assaults. Indeed, they do it under cover of law. Our legal system has countenanced that since the beginning.  Slavery was a legal status. Unions can be declared illegal. Children are legally considered property -- i.e. owned. All sorts of private, personal attributes and natural behaviors are subject to being ruled out of bounds and punished by depriving individuals of the necessities of life. Indeed, a failure to obey (work for someone) incurs the deprivation of food ("no free lunch"). What the big money donors were after was to enhance the system of legal deprivation.
      In other words, they used our money to a bad purpose and for that reason alone deserve to have it taxed away.

      We organize governments to provide benefits and prevent abuse.

      by hannah on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 01:45:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  it isn't just that they pissed away (9+ / 0-)

    their money, but they allied themselves with the GOP who has to entice voters with all the social wedge issues.  So the very thing that allows them a fighting shot at buying their way out of taxes, produces the toxin that keeps them from succeeding.

    They have no place to go.  They have to dupe people to hide the ultimate agenda, and the hate drives away just enough people to make sure they don't win.

    I think this time,  they overplayed their hand too publicly, and they are doubling down on the House.   If they keep Boehner talking about tax cuts for the rich, even the 2010 gerrymandering won't be enough to save the Republican majority in the House.

    •  if the democrats stand their ground (8+ / 0-)

      the republican house majority will get whittled down, as we move further from 2010. we have a tough senate map in 2014, but we had a tough one this year, too.

      the republican donors need to be better money managers. they got little return on their political investments. they would be better off even in today's low-value bonds.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:19:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  And when they back transparently useless stooges (6+ / 0-)

      like Josh "The Empty Suit" Mandel, people who don't bother to pretend they will serve the people they want to vote for the, the public can smell a rat. It still boggles my mind that they blew something like $30 million on this sleazebag — the most of any U.S. Senate race in the country — and were never able to make a race with a man they branded "the most liberal Senator in the country" remotely competitive. Their avarice blinds them to a lot of things.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:36:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Back door workaround for gerrymandering? (0+ / 0-)

      Integrate the voting districts. Dems moving into R districts. Educate the Rs on the facts behind the issues - move them away from listening to Fox-A-Ganda.  Flip R-voters into D-voters with FACTS.

      And by all means - vote with your wallet each and every day.  Instead of buying at an R-owned Home Depot, buy at a local hardware store....I am compiling my own list of businesses I boycott...Georgia-Pacific (Koch-owned), Red Robin and Papa Johns restaurants.

  •  Quite an excellent point (9+ / 0-)

    I once had the experience of working at an IRS processing center, where ten million returns came in.  

    At one work station, I participated in processing mega checks.

    I was kind of let down by the observation that a check for 13 million dollars looked exactly like one for 13 bucks.  

    Obviously the person who can write a 13 million dollar check can hire lawyers and lobbyists by the metric ton.  

    It makes sense that people are greedily interested in their own money, but it doesn't make sense that the rest of us should be asked to dissolve the social compact on their behalf.

    I think a lot of people said that the other day.

    hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

    by Stuart Heady on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:17:46 PM PST

  •  There's some nuance here. (5+ / 0-)

    First, political ads saturated the market, perhaps to the point of diminishing returns, in the battleground states.

    Second, the Republicans made very poor use of the material they had to work with. The Obama campaign did a masterful job - despite being told by many among the pundits and echoed on this site that it would be counterproductive - of using its ads like a scalpel to carve away at Gov Romney. This put the Republicans on defense a lot more than they wanted to be.

    Moreover, believing their own hype meant they focused on the things they wanted voters to believe, not the things voters actually believed and certainly not what was demonstrable fact, aka, "You didn't build that!"

    The money was wasted by bad political choices - the ability of that money to make significant in-roads into the political process perhaps remains unproven.

    The real enemy of the good is not the perfect, but the mediocre.

    by Orange County Liberal on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:21:51 PM PST

    •  it's always been true (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      isabelle hayes, JeffW

      that democrats don't need to have as much as republicans, they only need to have enough to get their message out.

      republicans can't buy many elections, anymore. traditional means of communication no longer control the political narrative. one viral tweet can have as much impact as the most expensive ad. and as was the case in ohio, too many ads just become white noise.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:26:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, one problem they had was... (0+ / 0-)

      ...that there were no programs proposed, or solutions offered by the Republicans. Negative ads only work so far, before you exceed the threshold of annoyance of the electorate. If all you have is negative stuff, you'd have been better off trying to bribe voters directly, though the outcome would probably have been the same. And it would have been a stimulus all its own.

      And Adelson would be really pissed off!

      Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

      by JeffW on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 02:22:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  As to all the money spent on ads... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      growingMajorityMN

      in this age of the dvr most people watch their tv pre-recorded and FF through commercials or flip back to an alternate channel during ad breaks on live tv. It's been a long time since I sat through a commercial to be honest. I don't think they have the same bang for the buck that they once had. That and the fact that the SuperPac ad buys don't get the same cheap rate that the campaign does, making it even less cost-effective. They've got so much money to piss away without a care but don't dare ask them to pay %4 more in taxes.

  •  I wrote this on a different diary. (6+ / 0-)

      I think that all that money was to buy a Supreme Court judge or two, and an Attorney General.
    The Presidency was just a perk.
    That would be the reason all those billionaires would be so upset.
    I believe that's what they really wanted.
    And I think the "smart billionaires" would see Citizens United not lasting long enough to be counted on forever.
    Better get in while you can.

    A president comes and goes but the Supreme Court lasts forever.

    "Is that your vegetarian leather jacket?" George Harrison

    by nellgwen on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:28:57 PM PST

    •  But it is ironic that ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Just Bob, kplatv

      the GOP thought, at least in media, that Citizens United would give them an insurmountable advantage - with money and super PAC's.

      Yet C.U. helped, in a big way, to derail the GOP.  

      For decades the GOP central committees tightly controlled the primary candidates, process and the "message."  Yet this year, with Adelson, Friess and others it was a circus, because C.U. let the Billionaires basically put up their own candidate.

      I'm not saying I like the Citizens United decision, but the results it brought this election certainly are highly ironic.

      The law of unintended consequences is alive and well.

      "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." -- Hubert H. Humphrey

      by Candide08 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:30:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  and the elimination of the estate tax (0+ / 0-)

      that grinds them the most.   I think it is one of the fairest taxes myself-  on rich dead people,  and almost every farm and small business can be passed on within the generous $5 million deduction.   Note this reverts to $1 million on 1 Jan 2013 if the "fiscal cliff" isn't solved-- so there's an issue.

  •  big irony (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, JeffW, eyesoars, annieli

    Perhaps the greatest irony is that the election got so much money out of the pockets of the wealthy and into the economy, thus a stimulus.  Ha

    "Lord what fools these mortals be." Shakespeare

    by outlanddish on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 01:53:32 PM PST

  •  Well, there is one clear winner... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, JeffW

    In all of this and that would be...The MSM. With all that ad money just rolling in from both sides and to a lesser extent, the USPS with all of the mailers. Can't think of one thing that the MSM wants or is going to change about this lucrative arrangement. Now that the election is over, they are already trotting out Boehner and McTurtle so they can pick up right where they left off. I'm sure that Fox is also going to crank up the crazy 'cause there is more money to be made in opposition to Obama. Time for the Dems to test out their recently developed spine and stand firm against the coming onslaught.

  •  OT... I'm a TU. All of a sudden, in this post, I (4+ / 0-)

    cannot rec nor hide.  Glitch?  TIA.

    Andy's two-timin' tail run off wiff mah sig line!

    by nannyboz on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:41:02 PM PST

  •  Saving the money... (4+ / 0-)

    won't give the the sense of power they enjoy.

    When you're rich enough to have whatever material thing you want the only thing left is power. Same as it's always been.

  •  Shh! Not so loud! (4+ / 0-)

    They wasted almost half a billion dollars on this. A few more of these and they'll be as poor as we are.

  •  Here's Another Huge Irony: (11+ / 0-)

    Almost every one of those ads that they waste their money on accused the president and the Democrats of wasteful spending.

    Dulce bellum inexpertis [War is sweet only to those who have no experience of it].

    by Fatherflot on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:51:02 PM PST

  •  Sorry, but this is not the best of all possible (8+ / 0-)

    worlds, or even election outcomes with respect to money. Yes, Romney failed, Rove failed, and homophobes failed.

    But Gates/Bezos/Walton money pushed through a charter school referendum in WA, the wealthy have to be happy about the Californication of WA's legislature with a succesful supermajority for revenue bills referendum also in WA, and the Koch brothers retained control of their midwestern subsidiary: Walker is still governor, and both house of the legislature are GOP controlled.

    There remains a lot of damage to be done with just those three outcomes, and I doubt that going around the nation, those are the only cases where government of, by and for the wealthy exists. Not to mention the big money that put a lot of Democrats in office.

    In Soviet Russia, you rob bank. In America, bank robs you.

    by badger on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:51:40 PM PST

    •  Ar. ruined my night. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      createpeace

      Lost the House and Senate due to the Koch bros. It's the first change in party control since Reconstruction. My only hope is that they over-reach and get trounced in '14 and '16.

      There's some evidence already that their hubris is going to do them in. They wanted to ignore the rules and swear in a new majority leader while some contests were still being challenged.

       

      "The human eye is a wonderful device. With a little effort, it can fail to see even the most glaring injustice." Richard K. Morgan

      by sceptical observer on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:02:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Unfortunately, Bush was a very good (5+ / 0-)

    investment for them. I don't see them stopping their attempts to buy our elections anytime soon.

    Due to recent cutbacks, the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off.

    by cyeko on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:52:07 PM PST

  •  This is one of my favorite conclusions to this (8+ / 0-)

    election.  The greedy upper classes who tried to buy this election FAILED, just like Meg Whitman in CA threw away over $100 MILLION of her ill-gotten gains in 2010.  Sheldon Adelson threw away hundreds of millions of his gambling casino lucre and got PWNED.  LOVE IT!

    Couldn't have happened to a more deserving bunch of crooks.  And the raise in their taxes won't come close to what they threw away on this election.

    Chumps.

    LOL!!!!

    Best. President. Ever.

    by Little Lulu on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:52:35 PM PST

    •  Sad part is we'll never know how much (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jfdunphy

      was actually spent/wasted by billionaire donors. The numbers that we know are only from the type of Pacs that are legally forced to be more transparent. Citizens United allows for unlimited, anonymous funds. These guys were going all out in this election...does anyone think that Adelson, Walton, Trump and the Kochs only gave to transparent Pacs? I wouldn't be surprised if these guys spent ten times as much on anonymous, unlimited donations as they did on publicly reported donations. We know what was spent on ads and how much in donations was taken in by the regular Pacs. Without accountability on anonymous, unlimited, tax free donations, who knows how much money these Superpacs have held onto/pocketed? I thought Palin was an effective grifter of the GOP but maybe Turdblossom actually is some kind of evil genius. At grifting...obviously not at politics or math. My guess is Rove will soon disappear. He'll either go Galt with a few billion in grifted billionaire money or he'll just be "disappeared". He should have chosen prison back in the day like many felt he deserved. Looking over your shoulder for billionaire's hit men sounds a lot scarier.

  •  Plus (3+ / 0-)

    they gave to consultants who are richer but now are poison. Now they need to find all new hacks who want to hitch their wagons to their dead horse of an ideology.

    Secondly, the media outlets;TV, radio, print, got rich and have now turned their guns on the Republicans (mostly).

    When you're born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you're born in America, you get a front row seat. George Carlin

    by Zwoof on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:55:55 PM PST

  •  They did get their Bush tax-cuts extended. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ActivistGuy

    That would have expired automatically, from the huge ‘democratic’ majorities ‘we’ had before the 2010 midterms. Republicans are still getting plenty of bang for their bucks (from 'democrats').

  •  These are the same people (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, OldDragon

    who shout from the highest hill top about what great business acumen they have.  They have belittled every step of the way any attempt Mr. Obama has made to improve the lives of the American people who are not so lucky, but who would value a chance to get a foot up, telling him he doesn't know how business works.  Well after this display of poor judgement and attempt to buy the election even a 5 year can see what type of person it takes.  

  •  Perhaps Nate Silver will teach them (3+ / 0-)

    about diminishing marginal returns.  It's something I did not think about before Citizens United and this election cycle, but there appears to be a limit after which additional money makes very little difference, and we passed that limit.

    The excess, as Laurence puts it so elegantly, was just pissed away.

    See you in Heaven if you make the list. R.E.M.

    by Akronborn on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:58:09 PM PST

  •  Their obvious solution (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse

    and one they've used successfully many times over in the past, is to equalize their political spending.  After all, there's only two parties to be bought, and pols by and large come cheap.  I mean who costs you more, a governor of New York or A-Rod?  Obviously A-Rod.

    Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

    by ActivistGuy on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:58:13 PM PST

  •  billionaire plutocrats: thanks for trickling down! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Zwoof, Laurence Lewis, jfdunphy

    yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:58:48 PM PST

  •  Taxes were only one issue (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Zwoof, 88kathy, South Park Democrat

    Some wanted no regulation
    Some wanted the Supreme Court
    Some wanted big contracts
    Some wanted to be free from federal investigation
    And for some it was just ideology that they bought like they would purchase a yacht, plane or other toy.

    They play a long game, and could afford the loss.  But what they aren't liking is public attention theyve received without getting the results that come with it.

    "I'm really proud of all of you." -- President Barack Obama

    by SottoVoce on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 03:59:54 PM PST

  •  talk about some "stimulus" money (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Zwoof, 88kathy, Laurence Lewis

    coming into a swing-state battleground and helping the economy,  the wealthy fools ought to be thanked for their kind generosity.

    don't always believe what you think

    by claude on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:01:05 PM PST

  •  some pundit on (5+ / 0-)

    MSNBC reported ( can't recall which show ) the day after the election that a billionaire donor told him that he is going to bankroll Santorum for 2016

    The world is a college of corporations, the world is a business Mr. Beale - Network ~ Montana initiative 166: corporations are not entitled to constitutional rights because they are not human beings; in MT money is not speech; it's property.

    by anyname on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:09:25 PM PST

  •  I'm a little concerned (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, 88kathy

    Can anyone quantify how much of the recent economic uptick can be credited to these folks flushing fortunes into lost causes and self-funded ego stroking?

    Will we actually see a tick downward next month comparable to when the 2010 Census folks wrapped up?

  •  The mistake was that they divided by zero(es) (4+ / 0-)

    Romney & Ryan

    "now this is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning." W. Churchill

    by Thor Heyerdahl on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:25:41 PM PST

  •  As I sit pondering a ponder (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon

    I ask myself just WHERE Mr. Adelson got all that largess that he showered first on the Newtster, then on Romney.  Was all that many many millions of dollars really his, or was he running a little laundry for others with their own agenda, whether it was Israel, or elsewhere.  He's the perfect man to do it, since he has those casino in the Far East.  I mean, who keeps track of all that loot, and who is to say what he got from those casinos, and what he got from foreign interests trying to influence our elections.  

    God, I'm starting to sound like some right wing conspiracy theorists.  But still, I wonder.

  •  this to me might be the best part of the night (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, OldDragon

    becuase to these guys it's all business and they put in almost a billion dollars and go nothing

    makes me wonder if we'll see super pacs less in presidental politics and more on the local level which does kind of concern me but then we can do the same

  •  But buying politicians is fun! (2+ / 0-)

    Besides, one must keep up the the Jones-Whidbey's ... they've already got 3 congressmen and a state senate!

    "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

    by nosleep4u on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:44:25 PM PST

  •  I think the thing to understand (0+ / 0-)

    is that this was an investment for them.

    if it had paid off with a Romney win, the resulting tax cuts would have paid off handsomely in the long run.

    I'm not really FAT - it's an unfortunate childhood nickname.

    by FatPath on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:48:40 PM PST

  •  Personally, I loved the idea in brainwrap's (2+ / 0-)

    diary of Wednesday or so that perhaps the $400M spent on Rmoney stuff in the swing states just boosted their economies enough to get people to vote for Obama.

    We all understand that freedom isn't free. What Romney and Ryan don't understand is that neither is opportunity. We have to invest in it.
    Julian Castro, DNC 4 Sept 2012

    by pixxer on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 04:56:28 PM PST

  •  um, If you're so damn smart, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, 88kathy, mightymouse

    Mr. JobMaker, why do you bet on a loser like the GOP?

    Probably because you're really just an asshole who inherited wealth, or got lucky, or you're a criminal. Most of us work hard. Being rich doesn't prove shit.

    This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

    by Karl Rover on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 05:12:36 PM PST

  •  the crazy thing is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, 88kathy

    that a lot of them probably shelled out far, far more money trying to make an election go their way than they would have ever spent in higher taxes.

    hope springs eternal and DAMN is she getting tired!

    by alguien on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 05:18:19 PM PST

  •  Hey Job Creators, don't blame Mitt or Rove (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, mightymouse

    Blame the Supreme Court. I think Citizens United wasn't passed to protect your corporate free speech. I think it was to allow political strategists and consultants to BEAT you out of cash like a televangelist beats money out of their flock. Welcome to capitalism 101. Obviously some of you rich fools needed a refresher before Mitt, Rove, Murdoch and Fox News got their dick beaters on you.

    How's it feel big corporate job creator? You just got worked, and Rove - Murdoch are even richer today, then before SCOTUS set the table for them to fleece you.

  •  First debate rope a dope to dupe Romney's donors? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Friend of the court

    "But Brandine, you're supposed to be in Iraq stopping 911!"

    by leftyguitarist on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 06:34:00 PM PST

  •  Love That Graphic (0+ / 0-)

    Perot's giant sucking sound is GOP ill-gotten gains flushed down the fucking toilet by hacks like Rove and Limbaugh, with Faux News as the pied piper.

  •  Hey Turkana (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shahryar

    I have a poper hate on for the Republican donors they suck. So do the Democratic donors which are largely the same donors. So my choice is Koch Bros. vs. Goldman Sachs? You really believe this current version of the Democratic party's ownership is going to help us, we the people I mean.  Or do you just fear the worst possible evil the maniacs of the right. Fear is a killer and it limits and narrows your vision of what could and should be offered as a solution to the by-partisan killers and thieves we are forced by extortion to call Democratic or our side.vs the stuff of nightmares  

    •  as i think you know (0+ / 0-)

      i'd like to get money out of politics altogether. i do think we significantly upgraded the senate, and added some real voices of people over money. we will see how it all shakes out. some of it fairly quickly.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 09:01:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  agree just venting (0+ / 0-)

        aimlessly. No direction home will do that to you if you care about the results of winning politically. Meanwhile lets see what the Democrat's offer now that they have defeated teh evil that was so scary we all had to get whipped into a frenzy of fear and loathing. I don't know but it just seems to be self defeating for humanity and the planet, so irrelevant to the reality we all have to live with.  

  •  The wasted money meme is going a bit far (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfdunphy

    Yes, there were some striking electoral failures for the GOP this time around.  But all that cash may well have helped them hang onto the house in spite of the massive unpopularity of Congress.  And it's still shifting the political dialogue away from issues that are threatening to corporate donors (e.g. global warming).

    I really hope this election does not convince progressives that all the cash unleashed by Citizens United is easily overcome.  Wealthy conservatives may not be mentally healthy, but they know that on average, they do get something back for their contributions.

    There are thousands hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root. -Thoreau

    by Frameshift on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:32:22 PM PST

  •  They're not worried (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfdunphy

    Taxes on salary is chump change to these guys. They make their real money in investments and Obama hasn't said word one about taxing capital gains.

    Their huffing and puffing about income taxes is just a minor skirmish on a small hill miles from the mountain of gold where they make their real bucks.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site