During World War two, in France, the local mafia had a good scam going on: part of it joined the government of Vichy and collaborated with the Germans while the other part joined the Underground, the French resistance.
At the liberation, the “collaborators” were caught and tried – but bailed out by the Free French Forces mobsters of the underground who testified that the one in the German side were actually working underground and provided a lot of good intelligence against the Germans. By keeping a foot on both camps, the mafia came up as a winner and that was a smart move. The Germans would have won, the process would have been inverted with the same results.
It is like playing roulette and gambling on red and white, even and uneven, or betting on the only horse left in the race – you cannot lose!
Why do I mention this historical sideline to you today? Well, presidential elections are on the way and the candidates are all telling you guys how things are going to change, telling us that the other are corrupted and bought out by corporate money, and that they are going to change the way D.C does business.
The three top candidates are voicing different point of views, representing different parties, claiming radical ideological and ethical difference – while “eating from the same eatery!” For one of them, it does not really matter anymore because she is about to be kicked out back to the senate where she has been supposed to represent her electorate from New York (disenfranchised voters through lack of representation?) – but still, it is interesting to look at the pattern in the “contributions” they got, at their top donors.
First, as mature and reasonable adults, I believe that we can all agree that there is not such a thing as a “free” donation or campaign contribution, a free innocent vote. Whenever we vote, or donate as individuals or as corporations, we are always expecting something in return, an agenda we support because we are somehow going to benefit from (Universal or private health care, less or more taxes, more or less food stamps, higher or lower minimum wages, Internet for all, foreclosure bail-out plan, reparations, open or closed borders, tax rebates). Stating otherwise would be hypocritical because we also know that part of being a politician it to have deep pockets tailored in the suits!
So here it goes. I did some little research to see who have shoved their hands up the behind of the 2008 presidential candidates and make them move and talk.
Are you sitting? Brace yourselves!
Among the 20 top donors for each candidate, we find five that are contributing to all of them. Again, as mature and reasonable adult, we can agree that neither political ideology nor political agenda and candidate’s personality can motivate such a strange move that remind us of the little WW2 story I told you as an introduction.
Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase & co and Lehman Brothers are these opportunistic “contributors”. Now you understand why the US of A is a country by the lawyers and for the lawyers!
Four other contributors are also donating across the aisle but mostly to the “old Washingtonians”, Mac Cain and Billary. Again, as mature and reasonable adult, we can agree that neither political ideology nor political agenda and candidate’s personality are behind that opportunistic behavior.
Merril Lynch, PricewaterhouseCoopers, UBS AG and Greenberg Traurig are the culprits betting on both parties.
www.opensecrets.org is a good place to start looking at who is behind the scene – if you care at all, of course!
A simple search on presidential campaign contributions would also bring mostly the same things – the results only vary because of the twisted and circonvoluted way campaign financing is regulate – PACs, coded vs non coded – everything to ensure that WE THE PEOPLE are totally screwed by the shrews!
Leave a Reply