Friday, December 11, 2015

Run for the Money, Two for the Show, Three to Get Ready, and Four to the Goal

Thanks a Ton - Check's in the Mail

Billionaire Sheldon Adelson and Wife

Two Out Front and in the Money Race
(Getting praise and billionaire bucks)


Candidates's #1 Target
GOP Hates Big Government, Loves Big Money
(And some DEMS just to be fair)



Key GOP donors are seeking to anoint Senator Marco Rubio as an alternative [to Trump].  However, Rubio has gone far beyond any other candidates in tailoring a foreign-policy platform that appeals to a pack of very hawkish billionaires.  Should he win the GOP nomination, their financial support may prove critical in a general election campaign likely to cost more than $2.5 billion.
That monetary support may prove costly to Rubio in other ways, however, since to please those big donors, he has endorsed policies that echo the least popular yet the most-unsuccessful American foreign endeavors over the past 50 years. Two key examples illustrate the potential damage he could impose and further set back American relations with numerous already-strained alliances around the globe:
1.  In the Middle East: Rubio is committed to rolling back the Iran nuclear deal and defending the illegal construction of settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories. That shift marks a return to the hawkish neo-conservative foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration, including the pursuit of regime change in Iraq, with disastrous consequences.
2.  New relations with Cuba: Rubio’s parents emigrated from Cuba three years before the Cuban revolution, He staunchly opposes the Obama administration’s establishment of diplomatic ties with Havana.  He also opposes any rollback of the 50-year old embargo, a policy that has failed by all accounts. Those stances has lost him public support as well as even among many Republicans.
Sadly, Rubio’s views seem out of sync with the electorate, and that might reflect the priorities of the deep-pocketed conservatives behind him, who prioritize their niche foreign-policy issues above nearly all others that they dislike, or more likely those they like and favor.
However, his eagerness to cut their taxes drastically probably doesn’t hurt him as a proposal even at this early stage – not even counting deals he has promised them behind closed doors.
I call it the “Rubio quid pro quo policy” – and it is as blatant as they come.
Original Post Starts From Here with These Two Key Question: Who Owns Whom, and how will they repay all the billionaire support?  Simple answer: Favors of course.  That story is from here and from a great reporter, Michael Isikoff.
It is the biggest financial prize in Republican presidential politics: the endorsement of Sheldon Adelson, the multi-billionaire casino magnate legendary for his willingness to spend huge sums to promote the candidates of his choosing.
 But this year the bidding to become the winner of what is informally called the “Adelson primary” has gotten complicated. After being wooed by virtually all the major GOP contenders, the 82-year-old Adelson (pictured above with his wife) was believed to be close to announcing his backing of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio shortly after the Dec. 15 Republican debate — an event that, conveniently enough, is being held at the Venetian Las Vegas, a hotel Adelson owns.
That scenario, however, has run into resistance from a surprising source: Miriam Adelson, the mega-donor’s strong-willed and equally hawkish wife. An Israeli-born physician, Miriam Adelson has become enamored of late with Ted Cruz, according to four Republican sources close to the couple. The Texas senator has impressed her with his unwavering toughness on national security issues, especially his support for Israel, the issue that the couple cares most passionately about. “He really likes Marco, but she really likes Cruz — and it’s a standoff,” said one well-placed Republican fundraiser familiar with Adelson family dynamics.
Um … GOP hopeful Sen. Marco Rubio (FL) may not be posting the same support as Donald Trump or Ben Carson in the polls, but he appears to be pulling ahead of his Republican rivals among one crucial demographic: Billionaire donors (from Mother Jones).
In the post-Citizens United era, candidates rely on mega donors to help fuel their campaigns and Super-PACs. For example, in the 2012 cycle, Newt Gingrich was kept alive largely through the support of casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, who donated $20 million to a Super-PAC backing him. This campaign cycle, several of the Republican candidates have super rich donors in their corner.
1.  New York Jets owner Woody Johnson is backing Jeb Bush (FL) , whose Super-PAC raised more than $100 million in the first half of the year.
2.  Foster “Bayer Aspirin Between Gal’s Knees” Friess, who supported Rick Santorum (PA) in 2012, has his back this time, too.
3.  A Super-PAC supporting Sen. Ted Cruz (TX) took in $11 million from eccentric hedge fund CEO Robert Mercer.
But now that the race to win over the nation's billionaires has begun in earnest, Rubio is poised to take the lead.
When it comes to the super rich, Rubio offers something the other GOP candidates don't: a tax plan that would completely eliminate taxes on investment income, which would disproportionately benefit the extremely wealthy. Be puts the quid in pro quo as it were...!!! 
Then add this developing story from Yahoo News here, in part, with my notes about Mr. Rubio:
Conservative Solutions Project, an outside group promoting Republican Sen. Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign, has spent nearly $8.5 million in TV ads — making it the second-biggest advertiser in the 2016 Republican race so far. But the group's apparent support for a single presidential candidate has raised questions about the advertisements' legality.
The ads, which have aired in the early nominating states of Iowa and New Hampshire, have featured Rubio denouncing the Iran deal and delivering one of his early political speeches in 2015 – months before Rubio's own campaign started running its first TV ad this week.
And unlike a Super PAC, Conservative Solutions Project doesn't have to disclose its donors because it exists as a tax-exempt social welfare group under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code. Officials at Conservative Solutions Project deny that the organization is supporting Rubio's presidential candidacy, with their spokesman Jeff Sadosky telling NBC News: 
“Conservative Solutions Project, as a 501(c)(4), is not about any one specific elected official or candidate.  It is focused on issue education and helping the conservative movement most effectively communicate with American families so that we win the battle of ideas and are able to enact conservative solutions to the problems they face.”
Meanwhile spokesperson for Rubio's presidential campaign declined to comment (actually, legally, they cannot be tied to or coordinating with these groups). In another indication of the group's support of Rubio, Conservative Solutions Project is directly related to a pro-Rubio Super PAC with a similar name — Conservative Solutions PAC – and it shares the same leadership (South Carolina Republican operative Warren Tompkins) and same spokesman (Jeff Sadosky). And the treasurer for Conservative Solutions is Robert Watkins, while the treasurer for Conservative Solutions PAC is his wife Nancy Watkins.
My insert: The website for Conservative Solutions PAC is all about Rubio's presidential campaign. Sadosky also told National Journal in April: “Absolutely, the two groups are related. [Then he added], but they are separate and distinct entities. One is focused on supporting Marco Rubio's potential presidential campaign, and one is focused on issue education.” And maybe most striking of all, NBC News has obtained at least two advertising filings with the Federal Communications Commission in which Conservative Solutions Project appears to describe its advertising as being on Marco Rubio's behalf.
Here’s my bottom line, if there is even a bottom line:  (1) Do all campaigns do this – yes, probably; (2) Do all campaigns and candidates not care whether they are breaking the law – yes, probably; (3) and is their strategy just to force legal action and hope for the rest (i.e., ride out the storm and hope apathetic voters get tired or just don’t give a darn – absolutely, 100%. Pretty sad, isn’t it – this state of affairs with tons of money buying government on your behalf – democracy in action, right – yeah, right.
Unless and until the public rallies and speaks with one voice that tells the courts: “Stop this madness – we want control and we want to decide elections for the kind of government we want, not what big money tries to buy or tell us they think we need” (for their benefit). Until that happens, which is unlikely nothing will change – in fact it gets worse each cycle. Pathetic I say and part of the path to our overall political erosion — now based solely on greed, power, and tons of money.
Finally, I note: Campaigns are barred from strategizing with 501c4s and Super PACs, and if anyone believes that does not happen of above from spokesman, et al, then they also believe in Superman, Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny. But, hey, who am I judge who they trust or believe, right?
That is the state affairs also today in our politics: Who to believe and trust and why or more importantly, why not and especially when Mr. Cynicism and Ms. Apathy are standing nearby to enlighten us. To be perfectly fair and honest, since I am and always have been against big money (in both parties), and I can say that big money does not always win since we didn't have a president Gingrich or Romney, but big money does tend to drown out good candidates with principles.
That is the issue. Then consider the sources of all that money and naturally, the purpose at the end of the day that mega-donors want — and believe me, they want something in return. That is the point of my effort. It all leads down the same road with the same destination: A more corrupt system each election cycle. Billionaire money, both sides, is the #1 corrupting element in our system … payoff’s, payback’s, or whatever one choose to call – the money is the root of all evil – to look the other way is to give away our past and future. If anything can or will bring down the U.S. it’s this issue.
Thanks for stopping by and please do your part to help turn off the money spigot that we read about like here ... check it out (from Bloomberg).

No comments: