Social Networks We Use

Categories

CT Tech Junkie Feed

Windows Laptops Now Under $200
Nov 1, 2014 11:00 pm
Microsoft, reacting to pressure from low-cost Chromebooks, now has its own low cost but fully functional laptop PCs...more »
Some Customers Say Transition From AT&T To Frontier Has Been Bumpy
Oct 29, 2014 1:26 pm
(Updated 7 p.m.) Customers who previously had AT&T Inc. landline, Internet, and video services were switched over to...more »

Our Partners

˜

posted by: Not that Michael Brown | May 9, 2014  3:03pm

Take heart Suzanne.  I’m sure your boy Foley will be getting checks from the NRA and the Koch brothers.

posted by: Joebigjoe | May 9, 2014  4:51pm

NTMB that would be preferable to getting money from a non-American who gets his jollies manipulating currencies and countries like George Soros. Yet another example of how our side is far from perfect, but it’s a heck of alot better than yours.

posted by: Stan Muzyk | May 9, 2014  5:10pm

@NotthatMichaelBrown: Juat like you are sure that your boy Malloy is going to cut taxes this time, upon wishful reelection.

posted by: Bluecoat | May 9, 2014  6:04pm

And Malloy won’t be getting any funds from all the tax payer money laundered through the first five companies? Right, Mr. Not that Michael Brown?

posted by: ASTANVET | May 9, 2014  7:53pm

Yo, mike brown - why is it that every lame attempt to talk about corporatism starts with the Koch brothers?  weren’t they #59 on top political donors list?  Right after almost all 58 liberal contributors?  unions, and liberal pac’s?  But you keep clinging to the unfounded statement that the NRA and Koch bro’s are in some way top of that corporatist ladder… If you think what the Koch brothers do is bad, why aren’t you pissed at AFSCME, UAW, TEAMSTERS, Center for American Progress, etc…etc…etc… (i’m not going to type 54 more examples I’m sure you get the point)

posted by: Barth Keck | May 9, 2014  8:21pm

Ms. Bates, you write: “What Citizens United did was recognize that a group of individuals — like corporations, non-profits, or unions — have as much right to free speech as the individuals themselves. Why, for example, should a newspaper — also a corporate entity — be allowed to openly endorse or oppose a candidate, but not some other organization?”

Well, to begin with, newspapers have always WRITTEN their endorsements for candidates, NOT thrown money at them. And therein lies the problem with the Citizens United decision: it equates “free speech” with “campaign donations.” With that logic, guess who has the most “free speech”? Yup. The people with the most money. Doesn’t sound so “free” to me.

posted by: CTSean | May 10, 2014  7:07am

In summary, she supports Malloys position. Her only objection is that she believes Democrats who believe in the principal of public financing of elections should unilaterally disarm and hand our government over to Republicans.

posted by: Greg | May 10, 2014  9:26am

Koch Brothers! NRA!

ok our turn…

Soros! Bloomberg!

There, the obligatory MSNBC/Fox News talking points are out of the way.

posted by: shinningstars122 | May 10, 2014  9:55am

shinningstars122

Ms. Bates some of your points are valid but greatly misguided in your general analogy.

Regrettably, and once again, your efforts become deluded as your prefer to continue your relentless, and over indulgent, attacks on the Democrats.

Instead of choosing to educate your readers, without wearing a partisan veil, on the real problems with the two most major SCOTUS decisions affecting campaign funding, Citizens United and McCutcheon; which you did not even choose to mention.

Contrary to what you allude to in your piece both of these major cases were brought from the right and the business community.

CT voters are painfully aware of the abuses conducted by both sides of the aisle and of the $72 million Linda McMahon spent on here twice failed Senate runs.

Which will go down in CT failed political infamy, along with the tens of thousand of her mailers that ended up in recycling bins all across the state.

You may not be aware of this, but the majority of elected officials in Congress these days are millionaires, or soon will become one after leaving office.

Your piece would lead your readers to believe the GOP some how has nothing to do with this dysfunctional and incestuous campaign fiance system?

I highly recommend you, and your readers, read an excellent book on the subject. ” Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—And Turned it Back on the Middle Class”.

It might open your eyes to what the real motivations are in the political system and who is actually behind it.

To partially agree with your final point… taxes are at the stake but we clearly disagree on what constitutes the abuse. Not paying them. Or too many people paying them.

Clearly the plutocracy and corporate America are winning this fight and paying much less in taxes than they did three decades ago. 

Equally both Democrats and Republicans are in a feeding freezy over the tens of millions being ponied up by dark money non-profits, Super PACS and corporations every election cycle.

As for the Governor.When you are running against a millionaire you have very few “honorable” choices under the current system.

That is not an excuse nor a justification.

It is the clear failure over the last forty years of the electorate actually not paying attention to what has changed in our country, and being constantly distracted by the culture wars and the 24/7 news cycle and quite often by writers like yourself “journalistic ” pieces.

posted by: shinningstars122 | May 10, 2014  12:59pm

shinningstars122

@astanvet where are you pulling that data from?

The big difference is what is now public knowledge. I take it your “list” is what made public. Dark Money non-profits or ” social welfare groups” as they are also know by, do not need to declare the donors and the amounts they contribute.

The Koch’s the Adelson’s funnel even more money this way into the process.
or rather the business of democracy.

Knock yourself out going over the data at this site.
http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/nonprof_summ.php?mv

From what Unions spend these days compared to the new ” social groups” that have popped up your comments are mute and grossly misinformed.

Yeah I much rather have Version, Chase Bank, or Monsanto watching out for my best interests…the working guy.

If you are off today or gasp! get paid OT thank a union effort for that.

Plus FYI Americans for Prosperity spent over $36 millions in 2012 election cycle. Crossroads GPS spent $71… that is the problem sir.

Not AFCSME.

posted by: Bluecoat | May 10, 2014  7:11pm

On a national level, where was all the outrage when the Obama campaign team purposely disabled all the credit card protection so that Hamas,  Dallas Cowboy Offensive line, Fred Flintstone, etc were all able to donate to Obama’s campaign not once, but twice.
And for those interested in the new Ed reform and Mr. David Coleman, the Chief architect if the Common Core,  check out some of the people he hired after becoming the President of The College Board.
http://education-curriculum-reform-government-schools.org/w/2013/08/common-core-author-works-with-obama-big-data-team-to-mine-k-12-student-data/

posted by: Bluecoat | May 10, 2014  7:13pm

Sometimes we seem to forget these things,
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-campaigns-massive-credit-card.html

posted by: The Court Jester | May 11, 2014  7:56am

As Astanvet said,  Not That Michael Brown is woefully uninformed.  This link will take you to the top donors as tracked by Open Secrets.  You have to scroll down to number 17 before you get to a solidly Republican donor.  https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php.  Rather than reflexively retreat to partisan popsots, I think we, as voters, should take a cue from the OP and demand our elected officials actually do what they claim to want to do when they talk election finance reform.  Novel concept…

posted by: Common Sense | May 11, 2014  6:36pm

I am alarmed over the contention that the Democratic leadership did the legal requirement for political money laundering to enhance their massive treasury.. That’s what happens when voters give one-party blanket control of the state to one political party—which is the reason for the bad fiscal shape that we are in. The Malloy campaign treasury will consistently tap our state treasury to keep their political treasury vastly ahead of GOP fundraising efforts that play by the book.