Corporatism, Corruption and Fascism
March 24, 2009 | Filed Under Barack Obama, Budget, Business, Communism, Congress, Dan Scott, Democrats/Leftists, Economy/Finances, Jobs, Liberals, Media Bias, President, Socialism, Society/Culture, Taxes | 2 Comments
-By Dan Scott
The current anger over the AIG bonus money is bringing a long-standing issue to a boil, Corporatism. Corporatists are politically connected business people who influence government policy and laws to financially benefit themselves. One of the marks of a corporatist is that they have fed from the government trough so long that the company losses its ability to compete in the market place. Feeding at the government trough becomes an addiction, and like all addictions binds it’s user’s life to be defined by it. Once addicted, there is no life outside and thus all attempts to reduce their dependence is met with screams of pain from withdrawal and claims you are the villain for inflicting that pain. Whether the company stands or falls is based strictly on government funding. AIG, GM and Chrysler come to mind.
The Democrat Party has had a long-standing love affair with the Corporatist as typified by Senator Christopher Dodd’s (D) less than transparent insertion of language specifically allowing taxpayer funds to pay for bonuses. Notice that only one political party was allowed to write that law in secret to the exclusion of any other voice or oversight. The relationship between Christopher Dodd and AIG has been lucrative for both parties to say the least. Say what you will about AIG being broke now, but prior to 2008′s meltdown of the market they were making money hand over fist. The supercharging of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) under Clinton made billions for the investors of AIG it’s officers and employees (including those who ran Freddie Mac – Rahm Emanuel and Fannie Mae – Franklin Raines). In this light, the CRA was a Congressional Quid Pro Quo for financial campaign supporters of politicians like Dodd, Obama and others in a mutual self enriching scheme at the expense of the country and specifically the poor. Let’s not forget that Barrack Obama was the lawyer for ACORN who forced Citibank to make unsound loans under the CRA. Makes you think of why Bears Sterns gave over $500,000 to Barrack Obama, a junior Senator with no supposed connection or benefit to them. They were connected alright, Obama’s legal work set the framework for companies like Bears Sterns for a lucrative business in CDOs up until the debacle. AIG provided the insurance on those CDOs because they all were mislead by the officials (political appointees such as Franklin Raines and Rahm Emanuel) into believing the mortgage based financial instruments had the FULL FAITH AND BACKING OF THE US GOVERNMENT, i.e. the taxpayer.
It is a cruel thing to extend a perceived benefit to a group of people and then get them into deep financial trouble ruining their credit rating. As most of us know, your credit rating determines more than just the mortgage interest rate, it also affects the cost of insurance (car, property, etc.), credit card rates, and even in some cases a potential job. When looking in hindsight at the supercharging of the CRA, Democrats like Dodd used the poor to enrich themselves and their allies. Obama now proposes to mitigate the situation for those whom he and others put in a bind by further robbing the taxpayer to rewrite the terms of the mortgages. The Federal Reserve now is literally having over one trillion dollars freshly printed to pay for this and guess what the purpose of this federal intervention is to accomplish? Why to get investors (Corporatists) to buy those bonds to create another feeding opportunity at the government trough. The only way to do that is guarantee the underlying value of the mortgages, because it was the loss of that certainty (assumption) that created the mortgage debacle and resulting credit crisis.
Obama received $112,720 from AIG employees in the 2008 election. Dodd received $143,500 in 2006 and 2008 election cycles:
from AIG for his campaign chest. AIG in turn made billions, and then stuck the tab for their excess to the taxpayer with the help of politicians like Dodd. There is a saying coined by Benjamin Franklin, “a penny saved is a penny earned”. Dodd by receiving a sweetheart deal on a home mortgage from Countrywide Mortgage reaped an indirect gain by saving him thousands of dollars a year in essence was a cash payment, a payoff. This is an example of indirect payment. Dodd is not the only one who took this payoff.
While there is justifiable outrage over AIG employees getting $165 million in extra payments for their activities, however this is a distraction from the real issues. Again, officials like Rahm Emanuel and Franklin Raines misled them as to the real risk and insurance is based on the assessed risk. If the people at AIG had not been misled then their premiums would have been substantially higher and therefore those who bought mortgages in the form of CDOs would have charged higher interest rates, which as a consequence would have then limited the number of economically challenged people getting mortgages in the first place. AIG is not the villain here, they are in fact a victim of government corruption. The show trials in Congress (run by Dodd and Frank) roasting their campaign supporters for their excess is more than just hypocritical, is a willful concerted effort to cover up their own guilt for creating and enabling this excess gone bust. If the Rule of Law, so vaunted in this country, were actually to be applied so as no one is above the Law, then the FBI, SEC and other government agencies would be busily conducting investigations of Dodd and other legislators who clearly have engaged in Quid Pro Quo activities. Let’s be perfectly clear about Quid Pro Quo, when a legislator introduces or writes or votes on legislation that benefits a campaign contributor that’s Quid Pro Quo. There is no parsing this type of political corruption. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid may have rigged the ethics rules for Congress so as to make it virtually impossible to run a foul of them, but the point of ethics rules is uphold the credibility of the process. However, ethics rules aside, it is a criminal offense, a felony, for a politician to use their office for financial gain no matter if it is direct or indirect. The lack of accountability by Dodd and others speaks to the lack of credibility of the Congress in the light of the outrageous bills passed against an overwhelming public outcry.
Another Corporatist group in trouble for their excesses are the auto company executives and unions. Yes, unions can be corporatists as well by the very fact they financially gain from their mutual interest in the company or industry and require the support of government to sustain them. Both groups gave vast amounts of campaign contributions to Democrats to finance their election wins. Both groups have been bailed out of their troubles by the influence and power of the very people who received their money, which is Quid Pro Quo. Literally billions of dollars in company stock value were saved for the executives and unions. When Congress passes legislation that uses taxpayer funds to “save” a company’s stock value as in the case of the automakers, they in effect have given them a tax-free capital gain.
It seems the Rule of Law only applies to those who are not politically correct. For years liberal Democrats decried Halliburton as VP Dick Cheney profiting from the Iraq war sparking Congressional investigations and furthermore made ridiculous unfounded assertions that President Bush started the war for Halliburton to profit from it. Yet when Democrats are time and again in actual conflicts of interests and corruption, there is virtual silence from the MSM, and zero interest by the FBI and other agencies. Nancy Pelosi proposed legislation for so called green energy and then invests in a company with Warren Buffet to benefit from the legislation, which was the third time she was caught with her hand in the cookie jar. Harry Reid engaged in shady real estate deals, which essentially gave him “tax free” capital gains in order to evade taxation. Where is the Rule of Law? The Rule of Law has been over thrown as evidenced by Geithner, a tax cheat, ascending to the Treasury or Charlie Rangel another tax cheat who literally writes the tax laws. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse!
The entire current financial debacle can be summarized up in the words: Corporatist and Corruption. When law enforcement fails to uphold the law or even question those who commit obvious Quid Pro Quo because of their political affiliation or standing in government then the Rule of Law has failed. The Rule of Law only exists when laws are enforced consistently and without partiality, since to do otherwise is arbitrary and with preference. Any regime other than consistency and impartiality creates second-class citizenship. We have become second-class citizens in our own country, for if we, the average citizen, were to behave as these people do (not just did) we would be in serious legal difficulty. Tell me, if you failed to pay your taxes would you get the same treatment Rangel and Geithner got? Let me put a fine point on that, if the judge were to level a fine or jail time for your offense, would you be able to demand the same treatment as those two received? What do you think the response of the judge would be for your impertinence? Is it any wonder why Rangel and Geithner act with impunity since the law obviously does not apply to them? Paying taxes was an option for them, not an obligation which everyone else shares. There is no check or balance on government officials when the Law doesn’t apply to them and we wonder why we have bad government?
When one group of people can literally write laws in secret with virtually no accountability then engage in public theater via a party line vote to pass it, what we have here meets the classic definition of a fascist state not a Republic. The fact that none of those who voted for the recent legislation even had a chance to read much less consider the implications of what they were voting for indicates they were not representing the people who elected them but were doing what they were told to do. Under such circumstances the only ethical and responsible action is to vote no, and continue doing so until representative governance is returned. Pelosi, Obama and Reid are not acting as representatives of the people, they are acting as a mafia, a corrupt unaccountable over class, consequently they are rulers not representatives. Combined with their mutually exclusive actions regarding legislation, taking Obama’s statement at face value, “we won”, no description of government matches other than a fascist state. Virtually every fascist state is operated as a crime syndicate enriching its rulers, which is where the presence of the Corporatist is required to provide the source of that enrichment by various means. When a person or group engage in ongoing criminal activity hijacks a legitimate entity, this is called Enterprise Corruption. Like all crime organizations they have their hit men to instill fear in the public to tamp down opposition and any perceived future threat to their hold on power. The MSM has been engaging in character assassination (Cramer, Limbaugh, Joe the Plumber, etc) to quell and discredit any opposition to the current political organized crime syndicate. It has already been exposed that Rahm Emanuel has regular contact with certain people in the MSM to “coordinate” the message from the White House. Are those the actions of a republic or a fascist state?
When viewing each of these incidents by themselves, they seem petty and self-serving, however, viewing them in context of each other a new and more sinister picture emerges. When will law enforcement and prosecutors start upholding the Law? Are we saying there isn’t even one government official with the guts to take on the political mafia? Is this what Chicago looked like during Prohibition? What event or circumstance would be so galvanizing that Law Enforcement will believe they must act to uphold the Law? This is what happens when politicians are elected to office based on popularity versus leadership (responsibility). Any popularity contest can be rigged given enough money, deceit and false hope, Barrack Obama had all three in abundance. Obama was certainly popular as evidenced by the gushing MSM and disproportionately positive press, however he is certainly not responsible as a leader even though he demands to run the country. Will we as a people finally learn that substance is more important than perception? Each of these corrupt politicians were “elected” by a majority of the electorate. Al Capone was popular in his time but did that make him a representative worthy of being a leader?
———-
Dan Scott calls himself a “Member of the Global Capitalist Cabal preaching Capitalism and personal responsibility as the economic solution to world poverty.” He is also a member of the 14th Amendment Society — victimhood is a liberal code word for denying the civil rights of others. He is also a proud member of the Global Warming Denier Cabal, insisting that facts not agendas determine the truth.
Dan can be seen on the web at http://www.geocities.com/fightbigotry2002/ as well as http://www.geocities.com/dscott8186/saidwebpage.htm, And can be reached for comments at dscott8186@yahoo.com.
Fair Use: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Leave a Comment
If you would like to make a comment, please register to do so. I hate to do that but there are so many spam-bots out there that deleting spam comments would be a full time job if I were to just open it up for anyone without asking them to jump through a few hoops first.
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment. Anyone can register. No registrant's information is kept, used, or sold. CLICK HERE TO REGISTER
Social Networking
Help the Soldiers!
American Genius
Our Founding Ideas- The Declaration of Independence
- The Federalist Papers
- The U.S. Constitution
- Debates of 1787
- The Anti-Federalist Papers
- The Writing of John Locke
"Governments are instituted among men,deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
Recently Written
Featured Sites
What THEY Say:
Foreign News In English
Illini Alliance
Blogroll
of Thinking
Political Parties
Contact Us
Email Publius' ForumArchives
Links
Other Blogs
MilBlogs
Religion
Gun Rights
Education
Separation of School
from State
Radio Hosts
| Blog: |
| Publius' Forum |
Topics: |
| Politics, News, Commentary |
