Tag Archives: New York Times

Nov 26 2022

Important Discussion – Let’s Talk About 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court Decision with a Decade of Hindsight


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 25, 2022 | Sundance

I have given a great deal of thought to this in the past several years and I am welcoming all opinions.  Just to let you know I intend to read every single comment, because ultimately this is important. AND I believe it will become a silent topic in the next two years [As did the recent conversation of Ballots -vs- Votes].

In 2010 the Supreme Court ruled on a campaign finance legal challenge known colloquially as The Citizens United decision.  The essence of the decision was a speech issue. In the court’s opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that limiting “independent political spending” from corporations and other groups violates the First Amendment right to free speech.

Prior to CU corporations were limited in financial spending on behalf of political campaigns just like individuals.  However, unions were not.  Organized Labor Unions could spend unlimited amounts in support of candidates.  Corporations were limited like individuals.

At the time of the January 2010 Supreme Court ruling Democrats and Barack Obama were furious.  Corporations could not form SuperPACs and spend unlimited amounts of money ‘independently’ supporting candidates.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules on coordination and communication between the political campaigns and the independent SuperPACs was/is supposed to create a firewall.  However, the obscure nature of that effort has failed miserably.

Real World Example. A SuperPAC can organize a pro-Ben rally, spend on the venue, spend on the banners, t-shirts, rally material etc., and then advertise it.  If Ben shows up to deliver a speech, he’s not breaking the rules so long as Ben and the SuperPAC didn’t coordinate the event.  Ben just shows up to share his support for the effort, thank everyone and everything is legal in the eyes of the FEC.  Yeah, it’s goofy.

More commonly as a result of the Citizens United (CU) case, massive corporate advertising (considered speech) is permitted in support of the candidate; or the corporation can organize ballot collection or get out the vote efforts, etc.  Again, as long as they do not coordinate with any “official campaign” ie. Mark Zuckerbucks, yeah, goofy.   As a result, expanded corporate spending has massive influence over U.S. elections.

♦ Oppose CU – Democrats opposed the CU decision because they had an advantage with organized labor.  Labor unions were considered a representative body of collective individual membership interests and could spend without limit on campaign support.  Organized labor unions supported democrats.   Factually, Barack Obama won his 2008 election specifically because the SEIU, AFSCME, UFCW, AFL-CIO and other organized labor supported him over Hillary Clinton.

The CU decision watered down this overall Democrat advantage because now corporations funding Republicans could counterbalance the spending support of the labor unions.  Democrats stated the CU decision would inject billions into politics and would increase corruption.

♦ PRO CU – Republicans, in a general sense, supported the CU decision mostly because it did level the field with labor unions and also because the corporate lobbyist connections to the republican party meant a lot of corporate money was available to fuel republican Super Political Action Committees (SuperPACs).  Factually, the CU decision created the ability of SuperPACs to exist.

The business of politics expanded with the CU decision and ultimately both the DNC and RNC clubs evolved to enjoy this unlimited donor spending.

The business sector of politics expanded as the financial aspects to the it grew.  SuperPACs could now fund consultants, polling firms, campaign systems and the money inside politics as a business exploded.

Now we have political campaigns where spending tens-of-millions on a single race is commonplace.  The modern ballot collection (harvesting etc) is now funded by this same flow of unlimited financial resources.

At the time of the 2010 Citizens United decision, I personally was in support of the ruling.  However, in hindsight the benefits of leveling the field with organized labor have become overshadowed by the negatives associated with corporations now in control of which candidates achieve office.

Money was always a corrupting issue and politicians working on behalf of their donors was always problematic, long before the Supreme Court CU decision.  However, CU exploded that problem on a scale that was/is almost unimaginable at the time.

A previous several million-dollar presidential campaign is now a multi-billion-dollar venture, and the corporations are purchasing every outcome.

So, here’s the question….

Knowing what you know now, how do you feel about the Citizens United decision?

Nov 26 2022

Twitter Alternative BACKFIRES On Woke, Leftists Start Getting Banned For Being Whiny Babies


TimcastIRL Published Originally on Rumble on November 24, 2022 

Twitter Alternative BACKFIRES On Woke, Leftists Start Getting Banned For Being Whiny Babies

Nov 25 2022

The Day the Narratives Collapsed | Hoffman, Harmeet, Bovard, Walker, ALX, Sav| The Charlie Kirk Show


The Charlie Kirk Show Published  originally on Rumble on November 23, 2022 

All eyes remain fixed on Arizona and we kick off the show with Jake Hoffman, senator-elect and chair of the AZ Freedom Caucus followed by Lake Campaign lawyer, Harmeet Dhillon. Next up we have Rachel Bovard on her NYT column challenging the Trump doomers and Herschel Walker lays out the stakes in Georgia’s Senate runoff. Finally, ALX and Savanah Hernandez talk Twitter and Libby Emmons does a deep dive into just how extensive the FTX fraud and Democrat bribery goes. The Charlie Kirk Show is LIVE on Salem Radio stations across the country and simulcasting on Real America’s Voice.

Nov 24 2022

Reminder, Watch Inside RNC Club Rule Changes and 2024 Moves Next Month


Posted originally on the conservative house on November 23, 2022 | Sundance

In the background of the republican dynamic, CTH has been reminding everyone about the nature of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and Democrat National Committee (DNC) being private clubs, private corporations, unaffiliated with government.  Most casual voters do not understand what this key and important distinction means within U.S. elections.

There are two private corporations representing Republicans and Democrats; they are most commonly referred to as political parties. There is no basis for the existence of private political parties in the United States constitution.  Both parties’ function from a position as private interests outside the framework of government.

What we commonly refer to as ‘politicians’ are selected representatives to the government from each of the corporations.  What we commonly refer to as ‘primary elections’ are suggestions to each of the corporations from citizens expressing their preference for the representative.   The corporation can individually choose to accept or decline the suggestion from the voters, and the only thing that binds the corporation to follow the suggestion are the corporate rules.

The corporation of the RNC and DNC exist to serve their own interests.  Politics is the RNC and DNC business; however, the income stream -the financial aspects to the business- is what holds influence over the corporate priority.  Ideology is part of the equation, but control of the business and generating revenue is the main function of the corporation. Unfortunately, in the reality of the business model, election outcomes are downstream from those two priorities.

It is with this corporate baseline in mind that all ‘primary election’ political analysis should take place.  The economics of the thing is what Republican officers in the RNC emphasize.  Without money, the corporate mission doesn’t operate.  Without money the RNC members -essentially board members- do not function, hold meetings, assemble, or participate in the organization.  Therefore, from the standpoint of the corporation, the business of politics (inputs) drives the activity, not election results (outputs).

This facet to U.S. politics is rarely discussed because the corporations and the people who run them do not want this process emphasized.  However, if voters do not comprehend this dynamic, they can fall victim to the fallacy of false representative choice.

The corporation is made up of members.  The members make the rules.  The members have preferences and ideological outlooks about the objective of the corporation as part of their position within it.  Inside this dynamic is where you see the changing of rules to benefit the preferences of the members; ultimately influencing outcomes.

Unlike most political sites, CTH watches this inside club dynamic closely because ultimately it explains a lot of ‘consequences’ that we see later discussed.  It is easier to just sit back and discuss the consequences than it is to watch the officials inside the club make rule changes proactively.  However, it is by watching the rule changes that we can see the roadmaps of influence within game as played by both RNC and DNC corporations.

Any political commentary that does not take this private club dynamic into consideration, and/or explain the consequences from decisions within the club, is not serving the interests of the American electorate.

The winter meeting of the RNC is taking place January 25-27th, in Dana Point California at the Waldorf Astoria – Monarch Beach Resort.  There are 168 members who will be in attendance (3 from every state) along with various RNC and national republican leadership.

This RNC corporate meeting, and the votes by the members, will determine the Republican Club rules for the 2024 election cycle.  Rules on primary dates, sequence, apportionment of delegates, distribution of delegates, state sequencing, qualifications and much more will be decided.

Rules that govern the candidates and campaigns of those who choose to run on the corporate identity of “Republican” will also be determined. Rules on financial agreements, expectations for data sharing, fundraising, contribution expectations (both directions) and much more will be determined.

It is inside this dynamic where one of the key club control battles is likely to take place.  It’s mostly boring and seemingly parliamentary stuff {Example Here}, but it has massive ramifications.

Some RNC members support MAGA, some do not.  Some RNC members support the Wall Street alignment, some do not.  Some members support the populist movement, others do not.  Some RNC members support a big tent approach to a working-class coalition, other RNC members regard the working-class as beneath their representative interests. The key point is that it’s a private club making these decisions.

The majority decision from within the club membership vote will determine each outcome(s).  Donald Trump may have earned 100 million voters and supporters, but only 168 unelected members and party officials will determine what that means to their corporate agenda.

There is no guarantee the America-First agenda of Donald Trump is in alignment with the 2023 priorities of the club.  Factually, all recent suggestions from the club control officers, the billionaire the Wall Street donors like Ken Griffin, all suggest the removal of Trump and the MAGA agenda from association with the RNC club should be the priority of the assembly.  The dynamic of financial influence, income to the corporation, changes the entire mechanism of the outcome.

As noted by ‘Niagara Frontier‘: “I’m watching for last-minute RNC rule changes for the national primaries and the selection of convention delegates. If we start hearing anybody, anywhere float a proposal in favor of Republican super delegates for the national convention, it’s total war.”

Niagara is absolutely correct.  The internal battle deep inside the club, fraught with influence, power dynamics and cliques positioning for control, is the part of the political dynamic that everyone should be watching closely.

We will be….

Nov 24 2022

Former AG Bill Barr: Battered Conservative Voters Must Return to The Era of Compliant Victim Status and Dump President Trump


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 23, 2022 | Sundance 

In an op-ed from the New York Post today, former Attorney General Bill Barr joins the not coincidentally timed call from Republican Club officer Paul Ryan to dump Donald Trump.  New York Post and Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch smiles gleefully, but the organized effort is transparent.

According to the diatribe from Bill Barr, things were much better for the leaders of the ‘acceptable Republican Party‘ when the unwashed masses of the unrepresented middle-class were compliant in their role as victims to the GOP.  Battered conservatives are so much easier to manage if they just listen to the high-minded pontifications of the professional political class, pull lever and get pellet.

The tone of Barr’s screed is condescending in the extreme, as if he is delivering his prose to the RNC corporate boardroom at cocktail hour.  With a backdrop buffet of crustless triangle cucumber sandwiches and a masked waitstaff hurrying to provide the gentle ladies with white wine spritzer refills, you can visualize the words “hear, hear” coming from atop the crystal glasses.

As customary amid these conversations, titles are left unattributed for the unapproved.  “Trump brought his wrecking-ball style to the task of governing the nation. He did not temper his disruptiveness and penchant for chaos,” says Barr, pausing intentionally to afford his eloquence time to settle amid the less intellectually capable.

“It took his senior staff and cabinet secretaries an ungodly amount of maneuvering to keep him on track,” Barr continued.  Murmured noises and well-toned grunts from the assembly communicated their seriousness in understanding and agreement.  Barr’s tenure was obviously a time of unimaginable horror.

Sympathy, shock and sadness afforded for Barr’s recounting of his survival.  Moments later, furrowed brows from the audience.

Yes, this vulgarian uprising has finally become too much for the shouldered cashmere sweater crowd to continue accepting.

All of this noise about good paying jobs, sound money, respect for a class of workers that will never sit in Corinthian leather, it’s all just too much.

Mitch leans forward, speaking in the familiar tones without lips moving, we must act now, or we may lose control.

The weight of the moment stills the room.

A younger voice from the Murdoch clan seeks to support the former attorney general by pointing out, “They don’t even drive cars – they use trucks.”  Almost immediately a reply, “Yes, and use gasoline,” from the affirming Perino, as widening eyes start to imagine it.

No longer content with patting heads and playing corporate pretenses to the base voters, now it is finally time for the well-educated to bring in the hired muscle and take control, even if forced evictions are needed.  It’s all just too much, too much.

Collectively they turn back toward Barr as he continues: “The threat is simple,” he says.

The time for toleration is over says Bill Barr, Paul Ryan and the billionaires who really matter.  The elite-minded self-appointed sovereigns have had enough.

“Unless the rest of the party goes along with him, he will burn the whole house down by leading “his people” out of the GOP,” shouts Barr.  The open hand slammed upon the lectern, while seriousness of the statement catches even the waitstaff off guard as the entire room turns to hear.

“Trump’s willingness to destroy the party if he does not get his way is not based on principle, but on his own supreme narcissism,” Barr continues.  “His egoism makes him unable to think of a political party as anything but an extension of himself — a cult of personality.”

Caught up in the lust of the moment a loud shout comes quickly from the back of the room, “REMOVE HIM!” is decried.

And just like that, the entire audience stares toward a stunned Ronna McDaniel, who was caught returning quietly to the buffet for another sandwich.  Embarrassed and unable to turn around with full cheeks, she gives the room a thumbs up over her shoulder….

Read the Op-Ed Here.