Beach Peanuts

Marco Rubio Demands That An Empty Chair Resign From The IRS Immediately

Oh my. The GOP's "best and brightest" "golden boy" "Tea Party Darling" and "savior" is at it again, faking outrage and making demands. 

Today, in the wake of the IRS "scandal" Rubio is demanding that the IRS Commissioner resign post haste:

"[I]t is clear the IRS cannot operate with even a shred of the American people’s confidence under the current leadership," Rubio wrote in a letter to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew. "Therefore, I strongly urge that you and President Obama demand the IRS Commissioner’s resignation, effectively immediately. No government agency that has behaved in such a manner can possibly instill any faith and respect from the American public."

Had Rubio done a little research and weren't so quick to register his outrage, he may have discovered that there is no IRS Commissioner. There hasn't been one for almost 6 months. Donald Shulman, the Commissioner at the time of the IRS probe, who was a Bush appointee, left last November. There is currently an "acting Commissioner" only.

But whether Rubio bothered with that pesky detail or not, it's really all about the outrage for him and the Republican Party. Not only is this just the latest in scandal fodder to use against President Obama, I'm guessing that it's also a way to try and intimidate the IRS from investigating the activites and qualifications of any 501(c)(4)  in order to determine if they're political in nature, and in order to give them their government subsidy.

It's quite possibly designed after the fake outrage when reports showed that right wing hate groups with the potential for violence were on the rise. Recall back then the GOP was outraged, and forced an apology for the accurate report, as if it weren't true. Those groups are on the rise, and of course there are groups applying as 501(c)(4) which are very much political in nature, but LOOK AWAY! They would also love it if you didn't recall that political targeting done by the Bush Administration was the norm and business as usual. (Did I mention the IRS Commissioner in question at the time of the probe was a Bush appointee?)

It's because of the rise in these groups, thanks to Citizens United, that the IRS was doing its job looking around in the first place:

Lois Lerner, head of the IRS unit that oversees tax-exempt groups, noted that the number of 501(c)(4) group applications doubled between 2010 and 2012. As a result of this influx, she explained, low-level workers at the agency’s Cincinnati office had flagged about 300 applications for additional review based on a keyword search. None had their status revoked or denied and the IRS apologized for the mistake. 

In the meantime, we'll watch to see if Marco Rubio, true to form, uses this as a way to fund raise off of said outrage for his very own Reclaim America PAC.

Ka-Ching!

Related articles

Rubio Still Running Scared On Guns, Refuses To Take Calls From Sandy Hook Victim's Daughter

Marco Rubio And These 14 Senators Vow To Cowardly Block Any Debate On Gun Laws

What You May Not Know About This Election, And What Republicans (And Rick Scott) Are Afraid You'll Ask

Question: Why are Republicans working against the very people, and the country they are supposed to represent?

A few months ago, Robert Draper came out with a new book, "Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives." If you read it, which I did, you're familiar with his description of what happened on the night of President Obama's inauguration in 2009.

During a four hour long "invitation only" meeting with their talking points guru Frank Luntz, Republican leaders in Congress plotted how they would sabotage President Obama's time in office while undermining the U.S. Economy. Among those lawmakers present was newly picked Republican Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan, along with Newt Gingrich and these Republican lawmakers:

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA),
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX),
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI)
Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA),
Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R),
Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ-R),
Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R),
Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and
Sen. Bob Corker (TN-R)

That meeting, along with the now famous declaration from Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell that his and the Republicans goal was "to make President Obama a one term President" started the ball of obstruction rolling that continues today.

Since then, other plans have contributed to the Republican sabotage of the President and the U.S. economy and everything else, to the detriment of the American people, and to the detriment of the country.

All these factors will now come together as we approach the general election, and the GOP hopes their plan will bring them back into power.

Unfortunately, many voters are unaware of what the Republicans have been up to, and that's part of the plan. They have done all they can to give out misinformation to confuse voters in order to deliver the election to their candidate Mitt Romney, and now Paul Ryan. (And that's just the beginning.)

This pair would be worse than Bush and Cheney, a "Bush Cheney 2.0," in that most of their advisers are the same ones from the disastrous Bush Administration, and they want to go back to the same policies that got us into the mess we've been in ever since. The President has tried to get us out of the mess, and in spite of Republican obstruction, he's managed to do quite a lot. The Republicans want this to stop.

So here we are.

The video below explains the GOP plan of action in a nutshell, a nutshell which also features Republican Florida Governor Rick Scott and his voter purge, which is part of the plan.

Watch the video and then share it, because this election is more important than ever. The Republicans know this, but here's what they don't want you to know:

 

Meet Connie Mack And Rick Scott "Sugar Daddy": Sheldon Adelson

What is it about rules that Connie Mack IV doesn't like? Simple answer? Apparently following them.

Not too long ago, Mack got caught sending official U.S. House taxpayer funded mail to residents in Florida who weren't even in his own district. Because this is a violation of the House rules, he had to pay the House back. Mack blamed others for the "error."

Then yesterday it was revealed that Mack got caught "pulling a Palin" by running up a $470 bill for clothing from Brooks Brothers and charging it to his campaign, a violation of federal law that bars the use of campaign funds for personal items including "clothing, other than items of de minimis value that are used in the campaign, such as campaign ‘'T-shirts' or caps with campaign slogans." Again, his spokesman said this was a "mistake," blamed it on others, and said this too will be paid back.

Perhaps Mack is feeling a bit like a high roller since casino magnate Sheldon Adelson has backed his campaign with a $1 million donation to Freedom PAC, a super PAC that supports his run for U.S. Senate against Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson. Adelson, who poured money into support for the failed run for President of Newt Gingrich, has been throwing a lot of money into the coffers of Republicans lately, including Florida Governor Rick Scott, who scored a $250,000 check for his 2014 re-election fund from Adelson back in June.

Some have speculated that Adelson may be pouring cash into Florida races to push for gambling in the state, which wouldn't require a stretch of imagination. Florida is certainly "up for sale" to the highest bidder, thanks to a governor who gives away tax breaks to large corporations and benefits from corporate donors, and unlimited and secret campaign donations thanks to Citizens United. Just in the last two days, Democrats in the U.S. Senate tried to pass legislation that would require disclosure of the names of contributors of more than $10,000. The DISCLOSE Act was blocked both times by Republicans, who clearly demonstrated they have big donors backs covered rather than their constituents.

But there could be other interests when it comes to Adelson, according to an investigation by Frontline and Pro Publica, involving the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Rachel Maddow explained the details in this segment of her show recently, and it's an eye opener if you haven't heard of him before. 

Take a look at Rick Scott and Connie Mack's brand new "Sugar Daddy," Sheldon Adelson:

 

Transparent No More: The Curtain Has Come Down On The Republican Party

To Believe In The GOP's America, It's Going To Cost You

Today Mitt Romney made a campaign appearance at an empty National Gypsum Company warehouse in Tampa that closed in 2008 and delivered his "prebuttal" to tonight's State Of The Union address. He tried to draw a contrast to the address theme "America, Built To Last."

Romney stated: “The President’s agenda sounds less like ‘built to last’ and more like ‘doomed to fail."

It's somewhat ironic that Romney chose a closed down empty business as a backdrop to slam President Obama, and the location says more about Romney's vision of America than it says about President Obama's.

While last night's GOP debate in Tampa proved to be less of a game changer than advertised, the real news came after the debate was over: The partial release of Mitt Romney's tax returns and Newt Gingrich's contract details with Freddie Mac. Each disclosed just a snapshot of detail and while those disclosures were "bombshells" in themselves, they left more questions than answers.

As Romney made his "prebuttal" he made no mention of those tax returns, which makes perfect sense for him because they show what happened to some of the millions Romney made when he worked for Bain Captial.

Those "job creators" Mitt Romney speaks of so often like Bain Capital buy companies, bankrupt them and make a profit which then gets shuttled off to Swiss bank accounts and tax havens like the Cayman Islands. Those who lost their jobs thanks to companies like Bain, and people like Mitt Romney are now getting a glimpse of where all the money goes. It doesn't go to create jobs, rather it goes into the bank accounts of the job killer at the top like Romney, who lives off his investments and what he saves by paying as little tax as he can get away with. In Romney's case that was a mere 13.9 percent for 2010.

Last night during the debate, when Newt Gingrich brought up Romney's history with Bain, Romney would change the subject to focus on Gingrich's history with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

And what about Newt's history with Freddie Mac?

The consulting firm founded by Newt Gingrich on Monday night released a copy of its 2006 contract with Freddie Mac showing it was paid $300,000 to provide unspecified "consulting and related services" for one of the federally sponsored housing agency's top lobbyists.

But a spokeswoman for the firm said it was unable to find an earlier contract dating to 1999 and renewed until 2002. The spokeswoman, Susan Meyers, also could not say whether Gingrich or any of its employees produced any written reports for Freddie Mac as part of the nearly $1.8 million in consulting fees it was paid.

What we learn by this "disclosure" is that Gingrich made lots of money working for Freddie Mac, but we have little clues about what he did for $300,000. Nice work if you can get it.

When Romney tried to pound Gingrich with questions about his "consulting and related services" with Freddie Mac during the debate, Gingrich would naturally hit back with Bain accusations, and on it went until Brian Williams would call a halt on the subject and move on to something else.

This back and forth between the two was a perfect illustration of everything the Republican Party stands for today, and Romney and Gingrich are the perfect poster boys for what's wrong with those policies. Any argument they make against the other comes back to haunt them. They might as well be arguing with a mirror.

Romney tells voters that "corporations are people, my friends" and to him they are. Romney calls Newt Gingrich an "influence peddler" and, well, it seems he is. Thanks to Citizens Untied, corporations can give boatloads of money to political campaigns without disclosing where it came from, and both men are huge beneficiaries, which they sparred over in earlier debates.

Yesterday the Center For American Progress released a new poll that shows only 17 percent of Americans agree that corporations should be allowed to spend unlimited money on elections. I would guess that this 17 percent in favor of Citizens Untied are the very same big spenders at the top who are "buying" Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.

There's no shortage of groups taking advantage of Citizens United to influence elections both nationally and in states like Florida where the Republicans are practically puppets for special interests. I'm probably not the only person in Florida who got a robo call interrupting the debate last night from Americans For Prosperity, the Koch funded front group behind the so called "grassroots Tea Party" movement. They were calling to invite me to join them for their local "Obama Forgets" State Of The Union watch party which is described as part of  "a 7-day effort that will highlight some of the Obama Administration's worst offenses to the principles of limited government and free market enterprise." Some of those "worst offenses" no doubt being things like regulations that protect consumers from big corporations like those owned by the Koch brothers, and demanding that those corporations pay their fair share of taxes and create jobs here in the U.S. rather than shipping them overseas, kind of like Bain and Mitt Romney did. Perhaps things like protecting consumers from big banks that contributed to the housing bubble, and those paid "consultants" during that time like Newt Gingrich?

Which brings us back to Mitt Romney's little "prebuttle" to the State Of The Union address in front of that abandoned warehouse in Tampa, where Romney said this:

“Ours is the party of free enterprise, free markets, and consumer choice. The Republican Party stands for personal responsibility and equal opportunity. We don’t demonize prosperity. We celebrate success.”

The vision of "free enterprise" that Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and yes, the Koch funded Americans For Prosperity groups aspire to isn't the same vision those who might vote for them think it is.

The Republican Party today stands for anything but personal responsibility and equal opportunity. The evidence of that lies in those Swiss accounts and those in the Cayman Islands.

It lies in those missing Freddie Mac documents.

It lies in countless abandoned warehouses like the National Gypsum Company that Romney used for the backdrop of his Obama bashing buzzword-fest in Tampa.

These Republicans are the ones who prosper and achieve success at everyday American's expense, Americans don't "demonize" that prosperity, they just want a fair chance at what used to be the achievable American Dream. It's the Republican Party who puts that very dream out of reach now for the majority of Americans, and it's the Republicans who demonize those Americans who dare to point that out.

The Republican Party is in shambles, and they have no one to blame but themselves. Romney and Gingrich and all the rest can argue and accuse each other of using those "weapons of the left" all they want. The curtain has come down on the party who are essentially their very own "weapons of mass destruction."

Romney and Gingrich are a traveling road show, a political advertisement if there ever was one for the last person you would trust to put in the Oval Office.

The Fight For The Affordable Care Act Is A Fight For Our Lives

Yesterday a report came out that showed the Affordable Care Act is saving millions for Florida seniors, and they're happy with the new law when they see the results and the benefits actually play out.

That's common for those who are facing health problems and working with their insurance companies. It makes perfect sense. Throughout the entire health care reform process, and even now, Americans are fed a steady stream of Republican anti-reform talking points. Republicans who benefit from big contributions from the health care industry want to protect big profits for those same companies, so they come up with catchy terms like "death panels" and "ObamaCare" to scare people while telling you that the President's ACA must be repealed for any number of nonsensical reasons.

Not included in those reasons of course is the real one: Health Insurance means big business and huge profits that feed the Washington revolving door. That translates to millions of Americans who can't afford health care because of the staggering costs. The Republicans want to repeal the ACA, and those in states like Florida are throwing up roadblocks along the way because they know what reports like that show: Once people see the real benefits, they like the health care law. 

If you've watched any of the Republican debates, you know that killing the ACA is a big rallying cry, and their base seems to relish in it. Note early on, when Ron Paul got a hypothetical question about a man in his thirties who has no health insurance but faces an illness. Paul said that choosing to have health insurance, or not, was "what freedom is all about." When the moderator followed up his response by asking: "But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?" the audience beat Paul to an answer by cheering, laughing, and shouting "Yeah!" Hypothetically they cheered the potential death of an adult, but in reality, those cheers include children as well.

You could parse this reaction several ways. That these are simply Paul fans who value "freedom" at any cost, that they have indeed fallen for the GOP scare tactics, or they're simply people who could care less if someone lives or dies and have the "I've got mine, so screw you" mentality.

Regardless of the reason for the reaction, this is today's GOP. No health insurance? Tough. Or as former Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson put it in a floor speech in 2010:

“The Republican health care plan: don’t get sick,” he said. But, he added,”The Republicans have a back up plan in case you do get sick … This is what the Republicans want you to do. If you get sick America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly!” 

Grayson was harshly criticized for his comments, but ask yourself, isn't this exactly what Republicans are striving for? Again, all the Republican candidates for President, not to mention all Republicans currently in Washington have vowed in one way or another to kill or weaken the ACA. Rep. Grayson hit the nail on the head, or perhaps the coffin: If you get sick but have no insurance, too bad.

You. Lose.

Unless you're someone who has faced a major illness without insurance, or someone who pays around say $1,000  a month  (not a hypothetical) for health insurance that covers little of your medical bills, Republicans have largely been able to convince many Americans that the ACA is almost as bad for them as the socialist, communist, Kenyan (fill in the blank with any ridiculous GOP label) President in the White House. But as the report I cited above shows, when you see true benefits as a result of the new law, you see the Republicans for what they are: Shills for the insurance companies. Your life meas little to them.

The ACA is facing an upcoming battle in the U.S. Supreme Court which gave us Citizens United, allowing mountains of cash from undisclosed sources that will make it easier for the Republicans to fight against President Obama and Democrats in the next election. Some of those justices who'll be making decisions in the challenge to the ACA are those who ruled in favor of Citizens United. They're also justices who attend fundraisers and speaking engagements with the very lobbyists and groups like the Koch brothers who are fighting against ACA in lockstep with the Republicans. One of those is Justice Clarence Thomas whose wife Ginni has actually earned a nice income by working towards the defeat of health care reform, yet Thomas has no plans to recuse himself from the case.

All these desperate attempts by Republicans show what many who supported health care reform during the battle thought would result: Republicans would begin to lose their message war. It would seem they already are. The proof is in parts of the ACA that are already helping many who would have been out of luck had it not passed. There are real people with names and faces, not hypothetical red meat for debate fodder. 

Take the words of a woman named Spike Dolomite Ward who wrote an Op-Ed last week in the Los Angeles Times. She was one of those Democrats who were disillusioned by the Obama health care battle and was angry enough at the President to change her party registration to Independent. She didn't understand the details of "ObamaCare" until she found herself uninsured, and diagnosed with stage three breast cancer just weeks ago. That was when she was saved by the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan, part of Obama's ACA. You can read the entire Op-Ed piece here, and I would encourage you to do so.

It's a real life example of how the ACA is saving lives NOW.

Who among us hasn't either faced an illness like cancer ourselves, have family members or friends who have? How many of those are lucky enough to have insurance that covers it? How many have none at all and could lose their battle (or already have) simply because insurance company profits and scoring political points for power are more important to Republicans in Washington who are fighting against them every step of the way? How many could be saved like Spike Dolomite Ward? Aren't her life and others worth saving? Should Americans have to settle for the likes of those who would cheer over letting an uninsured person die?

Show me a person who does, and I'll show you a person who never had to face what those they condemn are facing.

The Affordable Care Act may not be the best it might have been had it not been for the mountains of opposition from the health care industry and the politicians who did their bidding, but it's one heck of a good start and it'll be improved on in the future. In spite of all that, it's saving lives now.

That's why we have to keep fighting and support the law going forward, because this shouldn't be a fight about politics.

This is a fight for our lives. 

Follow The Money? Good Luck!

Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Citizens United decision, it's become pretty difficult to find out who "occupies the wallet" when it comes to political donations. In fact, that's the whole point.

Other than well known friend of Wall Street candidates like Mitt-I'm-Just-A-Middle-Class-Gazillionaire-Romney who has raised a mere $1.5 million in "pocket change" from banks, hedge funds and the like just since this spring, you don't hear much about where all that money comes from. Until recently it went largely unreported by the traditional media where the big bucks behind Herman-A-Noun-A-Verb-And-999-Cain were coming from. (Spoiler alert: "Have a Koch and a smile" with your slice!) 

If you listen to the corporate media, they would have you believe that President Obama is the Wall Street candidate (fat chance) and Herman Cain is just another uninformed Republican to replace lost Sarah Palin ratings. The latter may be true, but the average Tea Party voter is gullible and the Koch brothers know that. Add campaign cash competition from Karl Rove and the money-grubbing slug-fest is on.

The New York Times has an interactive feature on their website that illustrates the path campaign dollars travel from the smallest to the largest donations and numerous avenues they can take to buy the next election. It shows just how easily following the money on the campaign trail, one can get lost. 

While the paths on this horse race may well be "paved with gold," one can only wonder what we'll find in the winner's circle. 

As the saying goes, let's hope there's a pony in there somewhere.

"American Exceptionalism?" U.S. Weakest Worker Protections Among Rich Nations

Republicans love to wax so eloquently about "American Exceptionalism" and give glowing speeches on prosperity in America. Often they tie those beatitudes to what they call the "job creators," those enormous corporations who must be spared contributing their fair share of taxes at all costs, lest Armageddon will ensue....or something. They value those big corporations (or should I say "people") so much, naturally because they roll out the big bucks come election time. We've been told the big lie for over a decade now that in order to create jobs, those poor corporations just can't "afford" to go without those tax cuts. It's the only way! Otherwise how can they possibly create all those jobs?

Well, they don't, and here's just one facet of "American Exceptionalism" the GOP-Tea Party will never speak about.

From the AFL-CIONowBlog:

A new international comparison makes it clear just how weak  protections are for working people in the United States. University of Missouri-St. Louis associate professor Kenneth Thomas reviewed numbers from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and found that in 21 categories, U.S. workers are more vulnerable than workers in any [OECD] members (rich industrialized democracies) or even the so-called growing BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China…to being fired unfairly, to not getting severance pay, to getting the least notice on mass layoffs or being fired, to being stuck on a mouse wheel of temporary positions.

Thomas also compared the United States labor protections with those in Estonia, Indonesia and South Africa for good measure. The result, in every case, Thomas says on his blog Middle Class Political Economist, is that not only is the United States in last place, it isn’t even close.

We're exceptional, all right.

Yet the Republicans, should they seize control of the Senate, and even the White House in part through more union busting and vote suppression as a result in the next election, they're poised to make America even more "exceptional" with permanent tax cuts for the wealthiest among us, along with those "Corporate Persons" who create more layoffs than they create actual jobs. The same corporations that line their pockets with undisclosed dollars thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizen's United ruling.

Yet they seek to project accusations of "class warfare" on Democrats? It would seem that class warfare is the larger part of the entire Republican-Tea Party platform.

Welcome to the Republican's "exceptional" race to the bottom.

Mitt Romney: The "People's" Candidate

Phony corporate funded political campaigns? $$$$$$$$

Latest campaign slip-up from Mitt Romney? Priceless!

No amount of Citizens United "people funded" campaign contributions will erase this memory.

"Corporations are people too, my friend." If Romney says he's the people's candidate, take him at his word. He means it.

Some campaign slogans just write themselves, and for free!

Happy Trails, Mittens!

 

Hackers Access Florida Voting Database

How much faith do you have in election integrity in Florida? 

Problems with voting in Florida are nothing new. The state of Florida, after all, brought terms like "hanging chad" and "pregnant chad" into the election lexicon back in 2000. Floridians were blamed for the Bush-Gore fiasco when Secretary Of State Katherine Harris stopped the vote count, and were forever branded as somewhat "ballot challenged" when large numbers of voters punched in Pat Buchanan on their ballots by accident.

Locally Florida now faces redistricting and a battle over voting amendments that's being waged against voters who were in favor of them by legislators who aren't, with town hall meetings where those elected officials won't speak for fear of tipping their hand. 

We also have a millionaire governor who bought his way into office and since winning he's waged his own war against the citizens that put him there, along with those who didn't. With a whopping 29 percent approval rating that's bound to sink further to record lows, Rick Scott has managed to anger even tried and true "conservative" voters who up until his recent move to go ahead with the $1.28 billion SunRail project that will cost Florida taxpayers $651.6 million, were big fans of Gov. "Run The State Like Business." In spite of his low approval ratings and his penchant for killing jobs instead of creating them as promised, cutting benefits for homeless veterans, teachers, the poor and the elderly just to name a few, he's apparently oblivious to his own unpopularity.

Beaming with confidence after spending a long weekend with the Koch Bros. in Colorado, where he attended a summit with other Republican governors that he tried, and failed, to keep a secret from voters, (he later claimed this was on "personal time") he announced that he most definitely plans to run for re-election when his first term is up. While that statement may have shocked some, given the track record of this governor who seems intent on destroying the state of Florida, and is well on his way after just six months in office, how about this one:

"Governors make good presidents historically because they've had to make tough choices."

No doubt the "tough choices" Scott has made when it comes to cutting taxes for big businesses while slashing everything else if it benefits actual people in Florida helped him pass the Republican and tea party "purity" tests, and put him in a favorable light with the likes of the Koch Bros. 

Mission accomplished.

Given all this, not to mention campaign finance laws gone wild with the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that says corporations (like those owned by the Koch Bros.) are considered "people" when it comes to undisclosed donations, it brings us back to my original question: 

How much faith do you have in election integrity in Florida? 

If your answer is "not much," you're certainly not alone. If you find past election history in Florida a bit unsettling, (or nation wide for that matter) this latest development is unlikely to change that.

It seems that a hacker who uses Twitter obtained parts of the Florida voting database which has been subsequently posted to Paste2. It appears that the hacker in question wanted to show that voting fraud can easily happen today and dumped parts of the Florida database to prove it. From the comments of the release:

"So, this is a little ironic. Here is inside details of Florida voting systems. Now.. who still believes voting isn’t rigged? If the United States Government can’t even keep their ballot systems secure, why trust them at all? FAIL!"

The content was posted to PasteBin (same content) while Abhaxas tweeted, “Who believes voting isn’t tampered with?”

Republicans are famous for making claims about "rampant voter fraud" when in fact voter fraud is virtually non-existent, and they do so in order to enact strict election laws, like they've just done right here in Florida, and in other states as well. Oddly enough, the subject of fixing elections is rarely mentioned by Republicans, and whispers of "stolen elections" only come up when Democrats win. I say "whispered" because rarely are those claims ever pursued, and for good reason. 

So how hard would it be to "fix" an election? To tamper with votes? You can't control everything in an election. Or can you? When your party is out of favor and woefully unpopular, desperate times call for desperate measures. For evidence of that, one need look no further than Wisconsin. The GOP has been in pursuit of a permanent Republican majority for years and they won't stop until they get it. They don't spend their time in office on policy or "creating jobs, jobs, jobs!" They spend their time in office looking for ways to game the elections and working on strategies to gain power and keep it. Change the election laws, the campaign finance laws, break the unions, squeeze the middle class and give tax breaks to the rich. This from the self-proclaimed "patriots" who don't want to pay taxes.

Given all that, what's to stop someone from hacking into a voter database and tinkering with the numbers?

Very little, apparently. We're halfway there.

(Cross Posted at DailyKOS)

Supreme Court Hands Corporations Another Big Win And Sticks It To The "Little Guy"

(Photo: Beach Peanuts)

As if Citizens United, which unleashed unlimited piles of cash for donations to influence political campaigns wasn't bad enough, yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court dealt yet another blow to actual "citizens" and gave businesses another big advantage over consumers. Just like the Citizens United ruling, you can thank the "Bush five" ( John G. Roberts Jr., Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Antonin Scalia) for stacking the deck against individuals in favor of those big donor corporations.

This time the ruling deals with class action lawsuits, and potentially helps corporations avoid them altogether. The case involves a California couple, AT&T Mobility, and an objection to a $30 charge for what was supposed to be a free cellphone. Because of a contract the couple signed, they were forced to resolve any disputes against AT&T Mobility through arbitration.

The couple sought class action treatment, and a lower court allowed the case to go forward. In the Supreme Court ruling yesterday, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the lower court "failed to properly apply the Federal Arbitration Act, which overrides some state court decisions disfavoring arbitration."

What does that mean for consumers? Well, it's not good:

Though the decision concerned arbitrations, it appeared to provide businesses with a way to avoid class-action lawsuits in court. All they need do, the decision suggested, is use standard-form contracts that require two things: that disputes be raised only through the informal mechanism of arbitration and that claims be brought one by one.

“The decision basically lets companies escape class actions, so long as they do so by means of arbitration agreements,” Brian T. Fitzpatrick, a law professor at Vanderbilt University, said. “This is a game-changer for businesses. It’s one of the most important and favorable cases for businesses in a very long time.”

Put another way, it basically says a business can force consumers to sign a contract that would bar them from filing any class action against that company, which in turn protects the company from liability. If you want to do business with companies requiring that you sign such an agreement, you're stuck. The company now has unfair advantage over you to do whatever they choose, say like charging you huge "fees" hidden in the fine print for a "free" product, like the couple who filed the original suit in California.

Sure, you have the option of not doing business with any company who requires that you sign away your rights, but think about that. What company would be left to you that hadn't jumped on board with a contract that would give them carte blanche with consumers rights? Corporations are in business to profit. What company would say "well, we really shouldn't require an unfair contract against an individual that would be advantageous to our bottom line. Let's give the little guy a break?" With all the money that is literally being bled into political campaigns even as I write this blog post, what are the chances of that happening?

Right. Zilch.

Welcome to the new world of corporate domination. Since Republicans and the Bush Administration have succeeded in politicizing virtually every branch of government all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, you, the voter and consumer, are just plain screwed. Citizens United merely opened the floodgates.

Still think your "one little vote" in an election doesn't matter?

It matters.