Colbert Super Pac Super Fun Pack

My favorite Super Pac is Comedy Centrals Stephen Colbert’s Americans for A Better Tomorrow Tomorrow (ABTT). On March 31, the ABBT Super-Pac offered a Stephen Colbert’s Super Pac Super Fun Pack with many fun things in the kit. It includes:

• A Treasure Map
• A Secret Decoder Ring
• A Door Sign for your Official Super Pac Meetings
• An Allen Wrench
• A “Trevor Can You Help Me” Button for non-legal Advice
• A Turtles Don’t Like Peanut Butter T-Shirt
• An FEC Form for forming a Super Pac
• A Step-By-Step Manual of Non-Legal Advice on how to form your own Super Pac
• A Can of DAK Ham
• A set of decorative labels to decorate your ham as the immortal Ham Rove
• A legal disclaimer, which all good Fun Packs have

Colbert Super Pac Ham Rove - All of the brains of Carl Rove with 1/2 the sodium

The Congressman and Senators have to use the party supplied facilities, because it’s illegal for them to use their own office in Congress. So instead, they walk 100 feet across the street and use the cramped quarters provided to them by the RNC and DNC. Equipped with their list of large donors, they painstaking call their friends and other donors asking for more cash.

This is the trouble with the Super-PAC era we’re in. Instead of making things better for the politicians, this outside money in the election campaigns is tainting the individual campaigns further. This will probably result in our elected officials spending more time raising money so that they have a say in their own election.

This is the lawyer that pushed the Citizen’s United case to the Supreme Court, resulting in all of this secret money pouring into the political scene. I absolutely disagree with the Citizens United decision, yet James Bopp does a surprising middle of the road explanation of the reason for the decision and why it’s good for the American public.

But what I found most enlightening/startling were the comments on how the problem is that the $2,500 campaign donation limit to a politician is too low. The US Courts have always ruled that donations are not buying influence. Yet, Mr Bopp states this is the point of a political donation outright.

This is because it’s known it takes more to bribe a congressman. The known bribes are $99,000 for Congressman Jefferson of Louisiana and $120,000 for earmarks by Republican Congressman Duke Cunningham whom had a schedule of bribes in his desk.

Here is the quote:
“you can’t even buy a Democratic congressman for $2,500. The anecdotal evidence is that it takes $99,000 in cold hard cash to buy a Democratic congressman. That was the amount Congressman Jefferson of New Orleans had in his freezer.

Republican congressmen seem to go at a higher rate. Duke Cunningham had a schedule of bribes in his desk. The lowest amount was $140,000 for him to earmark your weapons system.”

Read the full text or listen to the podcast above. You’ll find the interview is balanced, no matter of your political view. If you find this is better than a Fox or MSNBC interview, then think about making a donation to National Public Radio:

Donate to NPR

The individual donation direct to a politician is capped at $2500.00 and as James Bopp says, will not buy you influence. You need to dig a lot deeper. If you ever gave $50.00 or $100.00 donation to a Congressman, did you expect to influence the politician? I have made these small donations and helped influence a race or two — not to buy personal influence of the politician — but in support of the general policies.

This post is an alive post and is going to be a running list and will be updated regularly as we capture the talking points. The current running list of talking points is in a list is at the bottom. The comments on the spin are up here.

On the BBC World Service show Hard Talk today, February 13th 2012, Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) spun the ‘leading from behind’ point.

On MSNBC’s Chris Matthews Show on February 13th 2012, Republican Strategist John Feehery used the talking points ‘leading from behind’, ‘job killer’ and ‘job creator’.

Lies
—————————–
Romney Keeps saying Obama is apologizing for America. This is absolutely a lie. Do we want an outright liar as President?

Talking Points In Alphabetical Order
————————————
Job Creator
Job Killer
Leading From Behind

Clint Eastwood is the latest target because Clint is registered Republican and made a positive commercial for Chrysler Corporation that aired during the Feb 5 2012 Super Bowl. Who would attack a positive commercial. Bush’s Brain (Karl Rove) did.

Why? May I suggest because it was a positive spin on the economy and that’s the last thing the negative Republican party want while they’re trying to beat President Obama. In my opinion that’s the same reason for the 17 million Republican debates, they can attack President Obama over and over and over.

Now, there wasn’t anything in the commercial about President Obama and it’s paid free speech of Chrysler Corporation something the Republicans ought to stand behind. Yet, it’s not the message the Republic Party wants to send. So free speech is only okay these days if it fits one’s own political belief. Otherwise, keep your mouth shut. Seems All Forked Up to me.

But what are the details, Mitt? Tell me a few things you’d do to help the economy besides, of course, the two points all Republicans stand for: cutting taxes and deregulation.

The Hypocrisy here is all of the bills that the new right leaning state Governments are passing. Here are just a few:

• Florida – Need a drug test to apply for Welfare and the applicant has to pay for the test up front. Forces someone with no money to BUY a $30 drug test.
• Virginia had just passed a bill requiring women to have an ultra-sound test done before having an abortion. This forces women in Virginia to BUY a medical procedure.
• Many states are passing photo-id requirements for voters. This forces Americans to BUY a photo ID to perform a constitutionally guaranteed right.

So seems to me the Republicans aren’t against forcing Americans to BUY things as long as it fits their policies of taking care of the very rich and cutting taxes.

Anyone with any connection to Historians, Librarians or any ‘-arians’ would know that would be the annual salary for someone in that field.

Since money isn’t cheap, what do you suppose that Freddie Mac executives were expecting to get by paying Mr Gingrich so much money? This was before the financial crisis of 2008 and Freddie Mac was sitting on a lot of cash … but to pay a ‘consultant’ $250,000 a year requires some sort of ‘deliverable’. What history is worth that much to a fortune 10 company? The history of influence and connections to the congress would be the most likely suspect.