I somewhat agree Carl.
I got a little bit lost on the last sentence.
But, I do think cultural referances and knoledge is important in order to
understand context.
That said, I totally agree with you in the literal notion of the thing and
that one need not accept Jesus Christ or any other god or demi-god as her or
his "personal savior". That is the utter absurdity of all religions in my
opinion, and, in fact in deed!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Jarvis" <carjar82@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 10:30 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: A Step Toward Election Transparency
Like Shakespeare, the Holy Bible is such a part of our thinking, of
our language, that we reach back without ever realizing it, and grab
at commonly understood phrases to illustrate our point. I suspect
that long after all memories of both Shakespeare and of Christianity
have faded to the back rooms of our memory, we will still be using
much of the quotes we use today because they are such a part of our
language.
This does not mean a person has to believe in Jesus Christ as his
personal Savior, to understand what the Scriptures are saying. Nor do
we need to settle any disagreement over whether Shakespeare, Marlowe,
Bacon, de Vere, or Mary Sidney Herbert actually authored this great
body of literature, to draw from the rich language.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/30/16, joe harcz Comcast <joeharcz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Brilliant! And one thing I really like about Moyers is his religious
analogies even though I'm an avowed agnostic. This goes to the utter
"poetry" of the prose as ironic as this might sound. Regardless, these
allusions are a part of the ethoes; the internal mechanisms that incite the
brain, heart, and, dare I say soul of the average American.
This is why I favor teaching the Bible and other religious texts including
the Kuran, not as dogma, or as fact, but, rather as cultural referances just
as the teaching of Roman and Greek mythology should take place.
Of course, I do think such courses should be electives but should be
prominent in our public schools again in my opinion, and again as a
non-believer.
Aside from these comments this again is right on on the seminal issue of
transparency at a bare minimum. To use another fantastical anology, wee
Americans deserve at a minimum the right to know that the man behind the
curtain is the so-called Wizard of Oz!
We have at a minimum the absolute right to know just who is pulling the
levers.
That is democracy with a small "d".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 10:33 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] A Step Toward Election Transparency
Moyers writes: "Barack Obama once confessed to politics' original sin but
has yet to atone for it. He now has an opportunity to do so. I speak of
his
promiscuous relationship with money in politics."
Bill Moyers. (photo: PBS)
A Step Toward Election Transparency
By Bill Moyers, Moyers & Company
29 January 16
It's time for the president to make federal contractors disclose their
political spending.
Barack Obama once confessed to politics' original sin but has yet to
atone
for it. He now has an opportunity to do so.
I speak of his promiscuous relationship with money in politics. During
his
2008 race for the White House, Obama opted out of the public funding
system
for presidential campaigns - the first candidate of a major party to do
so
since the system was created in 1976, after the Watergate scandals. His
defection chilled hopes that public funding might enable everyday
citizens
to check the power of the super rich and their super PACs, countering the
influence of "dark money" - contributions that cannot be traced to their
donors.
A friend of mine, a prominent conservative Republican who champions
campaign
finance reform (yes, there are some and we get along marvelously!)
recently
told me he believes Obama's decision was a significant blow to the cause
for
reform. Six years ago, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court
tried
to finish it off when they ruled for Big Money - unlimited amounts of it
-
in their Citizens United decision.
In his first State of the Union in 2010, President Obama denounced
Citizens
United, saying that it would reverse a century of law and open "the
floodgates for special interests." He was just as blunt last year when he
declared flatly that Citizens United was "wrong" and had caused "real
harm
to our democracy." Right on all counts. Public interest advocates Lisa
Gilbert of Public Citizen and Stephen Spaulding of Common Cause recently
reminded us that since Citizens United "special interests have spent over
$500 million from secret, undisclosed sources."
Think of it as poison poured into the mainstream of democracy, just as
toxic
as the lead released in Flint, Michigan's drinking water.
Americans of every stripe know money corrodes our politics. In a poll
last
year, The New York Times and CBS found that 85 percent of us think the
system for funding political campaigns should be fundamentally changed or
completely rebuilt.
President Obama knows it, too. Despite his own apostasy, he has spoken
eloquently over the years against the present system.
Unfortunately, he has done nothing about it. He's gone AWOL in our
biggest
battle for democracy.
Which brings us back to his confession. During that first campaign for
president, the Boston Globe reported that "In Obama's eight years in the
Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he
raised
for his campaigns - $296,000 of $461,000 - came from PACs, corporate
contributions, or unions.and many other corporate interests."
Confronted with this by Tim Russert on Meet the Press, Obama replied: "I
have said repeatedly that money is the original sin in politics and I am
not
sinless."
Far from sinless, he has in fact been a serial sinner. From repeated
campaigns for the state legislature, through his one campaign for the US
Senate, to his last campaign for president in 2012, money from organized
interests poured into his coffers. The finance industry, communications
industry, the health industry - they all had a piece of him, sometimes a
very big piece. In his defense, Obama said he could not "unilaterally
disarm." So like the young Augustine of Hippo, who prayed, "Lord, grant
me
chastity. but not yet," Barack Obama was saying that when the time
arrived,
he would sin no more.
Well, Mr. President, it's time. You have no more campaigns to wage. With
a
little less than 12 months left in the White House, you have the
opportunity
to atone for exploiting a system that you have deplored in words if not
deeds. You can restart the engine of reform and even demonstrate that
Citizens United can be tamed. Just take out your pen and sign an
executive
order compelling federal contractors to disclose their political
spending.
In one stroke you can put an end to a blatant practice of political
bribery
that would be one small step for you and one giant leap for democracy.
It's an open-and-shut case. In fewer than five minutes, you could face
the
cameras and announce your decision:
My fellow Americans. I have today signed an executive order requiring any
company with a federal contract to disclose how much they spend on
politicians and lobbyists, and who is receiving their money.
There are several reasons for this.
First, federal contracting is big business. In 2013 alone, the United
States
government spent about $460 billion dollars on contracting, with $177
billion of that going to just 25 companies. Since the year 2000, the top
10
contractors have raked in $1.5 trillion in federal contracts.
That's your money. All of it comes from taxpayers. And as the economic
analyst Robert Reich reminds us, you are footing the bill twice over. You
pay for these corporations to lobby for those contracts. Then you pay for
the stuff they sell us. It's only fair that you see how much it costs for
corporations to buy influence.
Second, there is a direct relationship between what a corporation spends
on
campaign contributions and the amount it receives back in government
spending. Federal contractors have long been banned from contributing to
federal candidates, parties or political committees, but that ban does
not
apply to their executives, shareholders and political action committees.
In
fact, since the Citizens United decision in 2010, contractors have been
free
to contribute unlimited amounts of undisclosed money to super PACs and
the
shadowy operations known as "social welfare organizations."
It's now possible for companies that get government contracts to
secretly -
let me say it again, secretly - spend untold amounts to elect and
re-elect
the very legislators who are awarding them those contracts. That's wrong.
It's a terrible conflict of interest that undermines the integrity of
government.
Some of you will remember that I said the Citizens United decision would
harm democracy. I wish it were not so, but I was right; this secrecy in
influence peddling by federal contractors is a bad thing. It wastes your
money. It distorts the relationship between your government and business.
It
works against start-up entrepreneurs who can't afford to hire lobbyists
or
make political contributions while entrenched old-line companies hire
former
government officials - members of Congress and their staffs in
particular -
to steer business their way. Let's put an end to these practices, once
and
for all.
Third, an open democracy is an honest democracy. Disclosure is the
foundation of public trust in government and business, while secrecy
invites
corruption. Even the Supreme Court justice who wrote the majority opinion
for Citizens United acknowledged this to be true. Justice Anthony Kennedy
belongs to another party than I. He adheres to a different ideology. But
listen to what he wrote: "With the advent of the Internet, prompt
disclosure
of [political] expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with
the
information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable
for their positions and supporters. Shareholders can determine whether
their
corporation's political speech advances the corporation's interest in
making
profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are 'in the
pocket'
of so-called moneyed interests." I agree with Justice Kennedy.
You see, undisclosed money - "dark money" - is not "free speech" as its
proponents claim. To the contrary. It's a threat to free speech,
especially
to citizens like you. Even if you believe money is speech, don't you and
every other American have a right to know who's speaking? Secrecy weakens
democracy's backbone, causing it to become brittle - so brittle that
fractures are now commonplace. That's one reason Washington is broken and
dysfunctional.
As Justice Kennedy himself - the author of the Citizens United decision,
remember - recently admitted, our system "is not working the way it
should."
The executive order I have signed today is a step toward helping us see
why
it is not working and giving us a way to start fixing it. We are casting
sunshine on a system badly in need of light.
Sadly, I must report to you that Republicans in Congress are opposed to
sunshine. They prefer government do business in the dark, out of your
sight
and away from the prying eyes of reporters. But the Sunlight Foundation
has
discovered that over one recent five-year period 200 of the most
politically
active corporations spent a combined $5.8 billion on federal lobbying and
campaign contributions and, in return, got $4.4 trillion in federal
business
and support. Yes, $4.4 trillion - with a "t." That's an enormous return
on
their investment in lobbyists and politicians.
Earlier this month I delivered my last State of the Union address to you.
I
told you that, "We have to reduce the influence of money in our politics,
so
that a handful of families or hidden interests can't bankroll our
elections.
And if our existing approach to campaign finance reform can't pass muster
in
the courts, we need to work together to find a real solution."
My record on this issue may not inspire confidence, but I offer this
executive order as an act of genuine penitence. And I pledge to you that
in
my remaining months as president I intend to take more steps to put right
what I have helped to keep wrong. When I leave this office next January
there will be no private citizen in the country more active in the fight
to
save our public life from the pernicious grip of private greed.
I am not a saint; I am a sinner. But I have been born again - again. And
this time I will keep the faith. If you believe in democracy, join me.
Thank you and good night.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
Bill Moyers. (photo: PBS)
http://billmoyers.com/story/lets-ask-obama-to-give-this-speech-next/http://b
illmoyers.com/story/lets-ask-obama-to-give-this-speech-next/
A Step Toward Election Transparency
By Bill Moyers, Moyers & Company
29 January 16
It's time for the president to make federal contractors disclose their
political spending.
arack Obama once confessed to politics' original sin but has yet to atone
for it. He now has an opportunity to do so.
I speak of his promiscuous relationship with money in politics. During
his
2008 race for the White House, Obama opted out of the public funding
system
for presidential campaigns - the first candidate of a major party to do
so
since the system was created in 1976, after the Watergate scandals. His
defection chilled hopes that public funding might enable everyday
citizens
to check the power of the super rich and their super PACs, countering the
influence of "dark money" - contributions that cannot be traced to their
donors.
A friend of mine, a prominent conservative Republican who champions
campaign
finance reform (yes, there are some and we get along marvelously!)
recently
told me he believes Obama's decision was a significant blow to the cause
for
reform. Six years ago, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court
tried
to finish it off when they ruled for Big Money - unlimited amounts of it
-
in their Citizens United decision.
In his first State of the Union in 2010, President Obama denounced
Citizens
United, saying that it would reverse a century of law and open "the
floodgates for special interests." He was just as blunt last year when he
declared flatly that Citizens United was "wrong" and had caused "real
harm
to our democracy." Right on all counts. Public interest advocates Lisa
Gilbert of Public Citizen and Stephen Spaulding of Common Cause recently
reminded us that since Citizens United "special interests have spent over
$500 million from secret, undisclosed sources."
Think of it as poison poured into the mainstream of democracy, just as
toxic
as the lead released in Flint, Michigan's drinking water.
Americans of every stripe know money corrodes our politics. In a poll
last
year, The New York Times and CBS found that 85 percent of us think the
system for funding political campaigns should be fundamentally changed or
completely rebuilt.
President Obama knows it, too. Despite his own apostasy, he has spoken
eloquently over the years against the present system.
Unfortunately, he has done nothing about it. He's gone AWOL in our
biggest
battle for democracy.
Which brings us back to his confession. During that first campaign for
president, the Boston Globe reported that "In Obama's eight years in the
Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he
raised
for his campaigns - $296,000 of $461,000 - came from PACs, corporate
contributions, or unions.and many other corporate interests."
Confronted with this by Tim Russert on Meet the Press, Obama replied: "I
have said repeatedly that money is the original sin in politics and I am
not
sinless."
Far from sinless, he has in fact been a serial sinner. From repeated
campaigns for the state legislature, through his one campaign for the US
Senate, to his last campaign for president in 2012, money from organized
interests poured into his coffers. The finance industry, communications
industry, the health industry - they all had a piece of him, sometimes a
very big piece. In his defense, Obama said he could not "unilaterally
disarm." So like the young Augustine of Hippo, who prayed, "Lord, grant
me
chastity. but not yet," Barack Obama was saying that when the time
arrived,
he would sin no more.
Well, Mr. President, it's time. You have no more campaigns to wage. With
a
little less than 12 months left in the White House, you have the
opportunity
to atone for exploiting a system that you have deplored in words if not
deeds. You can restart the engine of reform and even demonstrate that
Citizens United can be tamed. Just take out your pen and sign an
executive
order compelling federal contractors to disclose their political
spending.
In one stroke you can put an end to a blatant practice of political
bribery
that would be one small step for you and one giant leap for democracy.
It's an open-and-shut case. In fewer than five minutes, you could face
the
cameras and announce your decision:
My fellow Americans. I have today signed an executive order requiring any
company with a federal contract to disclose how much they spend on
politicians and lobbyists, and who is receiving their money.
There are several reasons for this.
First, federal contracting is big business. In 2013 alone, the United
States
government spent about $460 billion dollars on contracting, with $177
billion of that going to just 25 companies. Since the year 2000, the top
10
contractors have raked in $1.5 trillion in federal contracts.
That's your money. All of it comes from taxpayers. And as the economic
analyst Robert Reich reminds us, you are footing the bill twice over. You
pay for these corporations to lobby for those contracts. Then you pay for
the stuff they sell us. It's only fair that you see how much it costs for
corporations to buy influence.
Second, there is a direct relationship between what a corporation spends
on
campaign contributions and the amount it receives back in government
spending. Federal contractors have long been banned from contributing to
federal candidates, parties or political committees, but that ban does
not
apply to their executives, shareholders and political action committees.
In
fact, since the Citizens United decision in 2010, contractors have been
free
to contribute unlimited amounts of undisclosed money to super PACs and
the
shadowy operations known as "social welfare organizations."
It's now possible for companies that get government contracts to
secretly -
let me say it again, secretly - spend untold amounts to elect and
re-elect
the very legislators who are awarding them those contracts. That's wrong.
It's a terrible conflict of interest that undermines the integrity of
government.
Some of you will remember that I said the Citizens United decision would
harm democracy. I wish it were not so, but I was right; this secrecy in
influence peddling by federal contractors is a bad thing. It wastes your
money. It distorts the relationship between your government and business.
It
works against start-up entrepreneurs who can't afford to hire lobbyists
or
make political contributions while entrenched old-line companies hire
former
government officials - members of Congress and their staffs in
particular -
to steer business their way. Let's put an end to these practices, once
and
for all.
Third, an open democracy is an honest democracy. Disclosure is the
foundation of public trust in government and business, while secrecy
invites
corruption. Even the Supreme Court justice who wrote the majority opinion
for Citizens United acknowledged this to be true. Justice Anthony Kennedy
belongs to another party than I. He adheres to a different ideology. But
listen to what he wrote: "With the advent of the Internet, prompt
disclosure
of [political] expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with
the
information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable
for their positions and supporters. Shareholders can determine whether
their
corporation's political speech advances the corporation's interest in
making
profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are 'in the
pocket'
of so-called moneyed interests." I agree with Justice Kennedy.
You see, undisclosed money - "dark money" - is not "free speech" as its
proponents claim. To the contrary. It's a threat to free speech,
especially
to citizens like you. Even if you believe money is speech, don't you and
every other American have a right to know who's speaking? Secrecy weakens
democracy's backbone, causing it to become brittle - so brittle that
fractures are now commonplace. That's one reason Washington is broken and
dysfunctional.
As Justice Kennedy himself - the author of the Citizens United decision,
remember - recently admitted, our system "is not working the way it
should."
The executive order I have signed today is a step toward helping us see
why
it is not working and giving us a way to start fixing it. We are casting
sunshine on a system badly in need of light.
Sadly, I must report to you that Republicans in Congress are opposed to
sunshine. They prefer government do business in the dark, out of your
sight
and away from the prying eyes of reporters. But the Sunlight Foundation
has
discovered that over one recent five-year period 200 of the most
politically
active corporations spent a combined $5.8 billion on federal lobbying and
campaign contributions and, in return, got $4.4 trillion in federal
business
and support. Yes, $4.4 trillion - with a "t." That's an enormous return
on
their investment in lobbyists and politicians.
Earlier this month I delivered my last State of the Union address to you.
I
told you that, "We have to reduce the influence of money in our politics,
so
that a handful of families or hidden interests can't bankroll our
elections.
And if our existing approach to campaign finance reform can't pass muster
in
the courts, we need to work together to find a real solution."
My record on this issue may not inspire confidence, but I offer this
executive order as an act of genuine penitence. And I pledge to you that
in
my remaining months as president I intend to take more steps to put right
what I have helped to keep wrong. When I leave this office next January
there will be no private citizen in the country more active in the fight
to
save our public life from the pernicious grip of private greed.
I am not a saint; I am a sinner. But I have been born again - again. And
this time I will keep the faith. If you believe in democracy, join me.
Thank you and good night.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
