RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
read more of todays top articles

Intro: "A new investigation by the Center for Media and Democracy documents the big money funneled by one of the richest men in America and one of the richest corporations in the world to put controversial Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker in office."

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker speaks at a press conference, 02/17/11. (photo:AP)
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker speaks at a press conference, 02/17/11. (photo:AP)

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+16 # DPM 2011-02-20 00:34
Didn't Walker give out something like 132 million dollars in corporate tax relief just before his budget proposal? Perhaps those corporations would like to give that money back, to balance the budget.
Maybe if we all stopped buying Coke, as a protest, the Koch's could be pressured to back off until a better way to silence there influence could be found.
 
 
+20 # JayMagoo 2011-02-20 06:25
Keep digging. I'm sure we'll find that billionaires like the Koch brothers and Murdoch have injected their evil influence in many more places. The Wisconsin situation is disgusting and shameful, and the more we know about the big Republican money influencing elections, the better off we all will be. Can we do anything to stop it? Can we do anything to counteract the evil poison that Fox News spews out every day? No one knows, but the more information we get out there the better off all of us will be.
 
 
+22 # wizardbob 2011-02-20 06:51
Isn't it time that Scalia and Thomas were removedfrom the SCOTUS.
 
 
+23 # Walt 2011-02-20 08:46
The entire situation in Wisconsin is critical for every working person in the USA. We have already seen a take-over of the government by the money powers and corporate America. Thanks to the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court, our government can now be bought. Walker's election and many others are proof of the money invested to buy elected offices in the Congress and state governorships to benefit, not the people, but the money powers. If Wisconsin's unions fail, so does the whole country. Let's return the government to the people.
 
 
+20 # Willard Wheelock 2011-02-20 09:20
Come on, someone! POst a list of things the Kroch brothers sell so we can stop buying them. Just more evidence that by our apathy we have allowed our beloved country to be the real evil empire and not the USSR as The Glibber led us to believe.
 
 
0 # Mikeslot 2011-02-25 12:25
The Kochs operate oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota, and control some four thousand miles of pipeline. Koch Industries owns Brawny paper towels, Dixie cups, Georgia-Pacific lumber, Stainmaster carpet, and Lycra, among other products.
 
 
-21 # lnason@umassd.edu 2011-02-20 11:58
In the first place, money can't buy elections no matter how many times progressives try to make the claim. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Democrats in the most competitive House races have raised an average of 47 percent more than Republicans. They have spent 66 percent more, and have about 53 percent more in their war chests. According to the Wesleyan Media Project, between Sept. 1 and Oct. 7, Democrats running for the House and the Senate spent $1.50 on advertising for every $1 spent by Republicans. And the heavy spending Democrats got shellacked.

But in the second place, we should not deny the right to contribute to campaigns to people based on their incomes. That is un-American. And pretty self-defeating to boot since Obama and many big name progressives and liberals get so much of their campaign money from Soros, Hollywood celebrities, Wall Street types, trial attorneys and unions.

We need to call a truce in this particular battle and make the reasonable assumption that campaign contributions come from people and organizations that agree with one's political approach and stop stigmatizing the opposition for putative evil motives.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts
 
 
+10 # Ken Hall 2011-02-20 12:58
You should specify a time period for your claims that Dems raise more money. It's certainly not true in the long haul, and defies logic and fact. Repubs are proud to be champions of business, and corporations have the deepest pockets. Between 1990 and 2007, large corporations contributed much more money to Rs than to Ds. From insurance: (these figures are in millions) to Repubs, $216, to Dems $128. From oil: Repubs $198, Dems $63. From banking: Repubs $138, Dems $94.
I don't expect to convince you of anything, LN, your ideology trumps thinking, but I do want to give others the information they need to see your positions are built on sand.
 
 
+8 # Lee Black 2011-02-20 14:28
"we should not deny the right to contribute to campaigns to people based on their incomes"

So you would advocate a plutocracy?
 
 
+4 # Lee Black 2011-02-20 14:46
From the Washington Post, re: the House results - Democrats had more money than Republicans in the contests for 63 seats that flipped to the GOP on Tuesday. Democrats were more reliant on candidate fundraising and bank accounts from the previous election cycle while Republicans invested more in their own campaigns and BENEFITED FROM MORE INTEREST-GROUP SPENDING.
(Bold mine)

This is what Citizens United allowed in the 2010 election, if it carries forward to 2012 individual citizens will have lost their rights. That's why we are concerned. It means power goes to the wealthy and powerful to an extent where the less powerful cannot band together to counteract that power.
 
 
+8 # giraffe 2011-02-20 16:41
I am mildly surprised, given how often people invoke the name of the constitution in the US, that it is even legal to present a bill which denies people the right to organize and ... bargain collectively

divide and conquer

I am totally convinced that the USA will see some drastic economic/socio- political disaster in the next few years. I have been thinking much about selling and moving out of the USA

Opinion: Koch brothers are the pimps, R's the whores, Johns are those who vote the R's "in" ---

It is not democratic to allow money to buy our elections --- the Stupremes wined/dined Scalia/Thomas before the Supremes voted to let a corporation to be "like a person" and contribute $$$ that few individuals could contribute to a campaign. Scalia/Thomas are not above the law. They accepted all-paid for dinners/rooms/m eetings with the party (Koch Bro) party who had a case before the Supreme court.

Scalia/Thomas must recuse from any decision that Koch (etc) has before the High Court -- It's more than the appearance of an Impropriety - it is an improper "connection"

Congress??????? ???? Where are you on this mater? Either enforce the law or get out!
 
 
+1 # Ish Harris 2011-02-21 16:49
I respect true journalist, Lisa you are one. Thank you
Ish
 
 
+1 # Foxtrottango 2011-02-21 18:10
Scott Walker only reminds me of the good old days when corrupted or for-sale to the highest corporated bidder politicians were first tarred and feathered, than put on stage...the next one living town along with county assessors, gambling crooks, etc.,.

Oh, for the good old days!
 
 
0 # Dr P J Jonas 2011-02-22 19:19
Ah Contrar, Mr Nason, "Public opinion" can be easily formed by the advertising, blogs, sound bites, etc., that money can pay for. Since BIG MONEY can now spend as much as they want, thanks to the supreme court, to advocate a candidate it does lead to buying a candidate. The vast public can't be bothered to do any research, so the last thing they read/see is what they believe. pj
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN