Skip to main content

This is going to be a short one because I can't say it any better than the man who hosts The Young Turks.

He's got a thing going, and you can be a part of it.  We can all be a part of it.

He calls it "WolfPAC" and explains it all in this article submitted to the HuffPo.

Read it.  Decide for yourself.  I'm going to give it a shot.  Beats what the Supreme Court is doing to us.

My only quote from his article is this:

When asked outside of Independence Hall if we have a republic or a monarchy, Benjamin Franklin replied, "A republic, if you can keep it."
Enjoy what's left of the weekend.

Celtic Merlin

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

  •  Tip Jar / Spittoon (34+ / 0-)

    They've backed Democracy into a corner.  Time to come out swinging.

    Celtic Merlin

    Struggle with dignity against injustice. IS there anything more honorable that a person can do?

    by Celtic Merlin on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 08:25:22 PM PDT

  •  Thanks CM. (12+ / 0-)

    "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

    by HoundDog on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 08:47:16 PM PDT

    •  Just tryin' to do my part, HoundDog. (7+ / 0-)

      I'd like to avoid the pitchforks and torches scenario if I can, but I'm ready and willing to be a part of that if it comes down to it.

      This seems like a good start to a proper effort.

      C M

      Struggle with dignity against injustice. IS there anything more honorable that a person can do?

      by Celtic Merlin on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 09:20:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am starting to wonder (17+ / 0-)

        if pitchforks and torches are inevitable.

        The only trouble with that is that there are too many people who are not paying close enough attention, and they will take the pitchforks and torches to the wrong address.

        I also wonder when people are actually going to go after the members of the Supreme Court - I have not done any research on how you would remove someone, but it seems like there should be a way to impeach them.  If they continue to overturn years of legal opinion, especially legal opinion that benefits the people of the United States, in favor of the very very rich, or corporations.  You would think that there would be a remedy for that.

        Maybe Cenk's plan will work, but I think it will only address part of the problem.  Yes, we need an amendment that takes the money out of politics.  But we also need a couple of others:
        1) Corporations are not people
        2) Money is not speech

        Until these are enshrined in the constitution, we will continue to have some crazy decisions made by this court.

        •  All depends on how the amendment is worded. (7+ / 0-)
          1) Corporations are not people
          2) Money is not speech
          If private money is taken out entirely, #2 is washed away by a tsunami..

          The corporations being people is a separate idea.  We can work on that one along side this one, though, and include that language in the amendment.

          But we have to start somewhere, and I'm all for getting behind this to get the ball rolling.

          C M

          Struggle with dignity against injustice. IS there anything more honorable that a person can do?

          by Celtic Merlin on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 09:50:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There are two problems with this idea... (7+ / 0-)

            which tie into each tangentially.

            One, a constitutional convention is a very difficult process to control, i.e., multiple, competing political agendas with diametrically opposed proposals.

            Anything can happen... and probably will happen.

            And two: there's already a competitive political agenda with a diametrically opposed proposal from the right -- a balanced budget amendment -- that would essentially do nothing to get money out of politics but rather end the social safety net forever.

            With that said: I'm all for it. We must try something, and with the spreading of militarization of our law enforcement agencies in recent years, using the latest technology in weaponry are enabling these agencies to snuff out protest movements before they catch fire in the public.

            Article Five might just be our only shot.

            "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." - 17th-century French clergyman and statesman Cardinal Richelieu.

            by markthshark on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 11:33:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  The "money is not speech" provision would simply (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            a2nite, third Party please

            allow limits on campaign financing. It wouldn't eliminate private money entirely.
               Delimiting the difference between corporations and natural persons wouldn't be so important if their campaign spending could be regulated.
               But the blurring of the lines between corporations and persons has had unfortunate results. Corporations need to be put back in the box. It's absurd to claim that they have free speech rights on non-business related matters, or that they have the right to make false statements in advertising. As for corporations having religious rights - seriously?

        •  No, money is an accounting mechanism. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          third Party please

          Money helps us calculate influence and where it comes from. Getting rid of money is like discarding inches because your waist is too thick, or censoring writing because you don't like what's been writ.
          It's wrong to confuse the instrument for the result, except when we're considering hand guns which are, after all, designed to kill at a distance, a cowardly act.
          The problem with money isn't that it's in politics, issues that concern the polis; the problem is that the currency is being both rationed at the source (Congress) and hoarded by financial class. The result of these dual practices is that the ordinary person doesn't have enough currency to do what needs to be done.

          Whether the rationing of currency prompts the hoarding, as happens when other commodities are mismanaged, is an open question. That the currency hasn't been moving as it ought has actually been tracked by the Federal Reserve.

          The velocity of the dollar has actually been slowed to a trickle. "Trickle down" = screw people out of their money.

          by hannah on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 01:38:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Almost posted enough info (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alwaysquestion, Stude Dude

    to make this a useful diary.

  •  I think it's the way (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Malachite, Creosote, elwior, Emmy

    to go, but why not join Move to Amend?  They have been working on this for a while.  Everyone on this site concerned about money in politics should join.

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. - 9th Amendment

    by TracieLynn on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 11:31:28 PM PDT

    •  Because they're trying to get Congress to do it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      which they will not in the foreseeable future.

      Whereas with an Article V convention it might actually happen.

      But once a convention is called, I'm sure they and everyone else will weigh in, which is good and kind of the point of holding one.

      Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

      by Simplify on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 01:32:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Meaningless Nonsense (4+ / 0-)

    You wanna fight back? VOTE!

    Win the Presidency and the Senate till Scalia or the rest croaks.

    Or else is just meaningless manure.

  •  It's certainly "impossible" if nobody ever tries (6+ / 0-)

    This is exactly the sort of thing that I expect to lead to a huge pile-on in the Village about "seriousness", and who is, and who is not, serious. Sneer and jeer.

    To hell with them.

    The very sort of pundit or Villager who would stare down his nose at the discussion are the very same pundits and Villagers who never met a bullshit RW meme, frame, or narrative that wasn't worthy of some serious consideration even when what was put forth was sheer bad faith fueled fabulism or magic math. It's always time to cut Social Security and Medicare, but there is never a trillion dollar war of choice or national security freak-out that doesn't start out on third base amongst the elites in DC.

    America is facing an existential crisis, and that crisis is not the national debt or deficit spending the social safety net and it's earned benefits portions. It's Movement Conservatism and Movement Conservative policy destroying this nation like a cancer over time. In the case of global climate change, Movement Conservatism and the Randian Cult that funds it are posing an existential threat to the species.

    This is not about some bullshit "war of ideas" or "culture war" this is about life and death. Of a great social experiment, and of millions and millions of lives cut short over time.

    That is the vein I view this sort of discussion or idea being raised. You have to think about extremely difficult or longshot things and ideas that maybe you don't ever queue up in more sane times.

    Our founding fathers were geniuses. They put a certain provision in the constitution because they knew that a day like this would come. We have never had to use it yet. But we have threatened it many times and that threat has been incredibly effective just as many times. The clause is Article V of the constitution and it says that you don't necessarily need 2/3 of Congress to propose an amendment. You can have 2/3 of the states circumvent a corrupted Washington and propose a convention to get the same amendment. You don't need Washington at all. 34 states propose a convention for this specific issue. 38 states ratify that amendment. And we have our democracy back.
    It's a tough haul.

    But is it any tougher or more absurd than hoping a magic army of very liberal billionaires with open spigots for wallets show up like rainbow farting unicorns to save us from the Roberts court? I truly believe, as a hypothetical though experiment, that nothing will kill Citizen's United faster than a liberal billionaire or three cut from the Koch brothers cloth. The Right wants to live in a Citizen's United world because they see it as one-sided Weapon of Mass Destruction. If, for example, liberals suddenly had billionaires doubling what the Kochs throw down, they would shit themselves and kill it themselves.

    But the George Soros that only exists in Bill O'Reily's head is not real. They aren't showing up.

    Which means that the rate the Movement Conservative cancer is going to spread and erupt in new tumors is going to increase.

    At some point, what the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelsons, and Steve Wynns are doing is going to lead to civil unrest and open violence. The people who are putting policies in place, and rigging the rules and the game so that it's heads they win, tails everybody else loses, fall into two delusional catagories. 1. People who think their vast wealth will allow them to skip the nightmares that others, the little people, will have to face down. 2. People who think that God, or Jesus, will not allow them to come to harm no matter what they do to society or the planet.

    People are not going to just go off into the corn fields quietly to find a nice place to die, or starve, or fade away. If you can't feed your family, if you can't find shelter, if a slice of your wages are confiscated or garnished lowering what you earn, if you have a job at all, to poverty levels, you will do what it takes to survive.

    I'm willing to listen to Cenk's idea.

    A discussion of "crazy ideas" that are only crazy if you listen to people who see the GOP as the natural governing party of this nation certainly beats sitting around with a shit-eating grin on my face waiting for the demographics glacier to save us from the Movement Conservative cancer that is metastasizing faster and faster over time. I suspect that the Republican Party will be viable, and very much so, for a decade or two more than most Democrats seem to think it will be because the Right is fucking up institutions left and right to make this nation ungovernable. Money means that Movement Conservatism's failures don't seem to impact the viability of more Movement Conservatism passing into law.

    “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” — Auric Goldfinger

    by LeftHandedMan on Sat Apr 05, 2014 at 11:53:00 PM PDT

  •  The situation we're in, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Emmy, Hillbilly Dem, flowerfarmer, a2nite

    in which the social contract is broken and our government, especially Congress, isn't solving our systemic problems and is only making them worse overall...

    is exactly why the founders put the convention amendment path in Article V.

    Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

    by Simplify on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 01:35:10 AM PDT

  •  Be careful what you wish for. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Adam B, TracieLynn, PatConnors

    A Constitutional Convention can pass anything they decide upon once it's convened.  Judging from the state constitution amendments that have been passed by legislatures around the country this past 10- or 15 years, I don't trust those yahoos to salvage even the Bill of Rights out of the process.

    Get ready for the 10 Commandments and "traditional marriage" to be enshrined into the Constitution, along with whatever the Koch brothers buy from delegates, going the convention route.

    •  Your suggestion? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      flowerfarmer, a2nite, eztempo, PatConnors

      Your warnings have merit.

      Can you suggest a better way to proceed?

      My suggestion is that congress pass a law outlawing the giving of any private money to any public office holder or seeker.

      However, this requires that our law-makers act against their own best financial interests - which is unlikely.  And as long as the SCOTUS holds that the giving of money to politicians is a form of speech, such a law likely to be found "unconstitutional".

      So how do you propose to eliminate corruption among our law-makers?

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 06:00:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Any process with specific language attached (0+ / 0-)

        Given the unknown and scary "unintended consequences" that could flow from convening a constitutional convention, I prefer a grassroots movement pressuring Congress to pass specific amendment language that states in the simplest, most unambiguous language possible that corporations are fictitious entities that don't enjoy the constitutional guarantees of people and that spending money in political campaigns is subject to legislative regulation and have it go to the states in the usual process.

        Actually, my preferred process is what I expect to happen:  the election of another Democratic president or two in succession and the replacement of Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts (ugh! why is Roberts so damn young!), and a much more progressive and rational SCOTUS overturn these outlandish decisions.

        •  Here's one activist alternative: (0+ / 0-)

          Just found out about @99Rise on another thread, here at D-Kos.  Their Website is a call to join and take action directed at getting big money out of politics by advancing an amendment to overturn Citizens United.  Their plan of action is pretty much what's my option 1, above, with some juice behind it.

          As with any big issue and great cause, winning offices is the easy part; victory for the cause is hard.

  •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 07:56:11 AM PDT

  •  I think impeachment of the 5 Supreme Court (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, PatConnors, wigwam

    justices who don't understand the concept of money being a corruptive influence in politics and legislation is in order.

    I believe that Roberts lied at his confirmation when he said he respected stare decisis. His actions have proven that.

    It is overwhelming to realize that our government is now formally up for sale to the highest bidder. OPENLY for sale. Quite honestly, if this doesn't move the population to a collective outrage, nothing will and we will get the government we deserve to have for being such a docile, dormant, uninvolved citizenry.

    In this week's New Yorker there was a highly illustrative article called Chemical Valley which was about how industry interests took over the state of West Virginia which contained the following extremely interesting tidbit:

    The Democrat John Unger, a pastor and former Rhodes Scholar who serves as the majority leader in the state Senate, told me that he has identified three steps by which lobbyists win the coöperation of his peers. “First, they try to wine and dine you. Then they try to set you up. And then they try to threaten you.”

    Set you up? I asked.

    “Set you up in the sense of getting something on you so that you become beholden to them,” he said. “Back when I was a freshman, I stayed at the Marriott during the legislative session. And they would send people up to your room and knock on the door.” He continued, “When I looked out the peephole and saw who it was, I’d call down to security and say, ‘Someone’s lost, they’re knocking on my door.’ Then I moved out.”

    Explains a lot, doesn't it?

    I encourage everyone to read the article. As goes West Virginia now goes the entire country. Influence peddling no longer needs to be confined to dark smoke filled rooms. Bribery is now openly tolerated. The Supreme Court ended Democracy as we knew it. Incredible.

    “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

    by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Sun Apr 06, 2014 at 09:02:48 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site