For a party and a man that hold deep reservations towards capitalism, Democrats certainly jump at the chance to ride it – like all those corporate fat cats in their private jets! – when it suits their needs. Ah, but you see the argument isn’t over capitalism. That’s just bread tossed out for the masses. American socialists – those that are in the know, the elites – understand capitalism is the undisputed system of economics. Our infrastructure right down to the laws that govern commerce is capitalistic. There is no changing that. But how and where revenue is generated and then redistributed is where American socialism comes in. Here we are again, though. Socialism is rigid and nearly absolute in its means. This is the point where the road bends. The adaptation that has been on full display by the Obama administration is crony-capitalism, and corporatism. It’s not necessarily Socialism in the strictest terms.

Oil, natural gas, clean coal and nuclear energy exist. The benefits from which are well documented. Even liberals know this. However, through the use of regulations and legislations, Democrats are hell bent on creating an industry out of thin air. A lot depends on that point, too. For example, personal fortunes. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (only to name one. OK Al Gore, too) has invested heavily in green energy. The guarantees on investments are very secure. They come in the form of government subsidies – tax payers’ dollars. As I said, Pelosi is one of many liberal lawmakers who steer legislation to suit their investment needs. Business tycoons like T. Boone Pickens also played his hand in motivating certain legislation. After all, it was Pickens who started the Mesa Power green energy company which dealt exclusively with GE and a company heavily invested in by liberal lawmakers (again Pelosi). That’s a lot of money and connections associated with Democrat law makers and the White House.

(more…)

Rhetorically, President Obama prides himself on bashing “greedy corporations.”  Insurance companies, the health care industry and Wall Street have all been subjected to verbal abuse from the president.  Despite his statements, the Obama Administration policy often rests on corporatism – the policy of using government to enhance market share of a few favorite firms.

The record is clear — President Obama has little reservation about plying companies with tax incentives, bailout money, secured loans – even to promote off-shore oil drilling in Brazil — or policy initiatives if it fits his worldview.  The president continues to tout the “success” of corporate bailouts for Wall Street and the car companies.

A classic example of corporatism is the recent news reports that Steven Westly a major contributor to the Obama campaign and a promoter of “alternative energy,” received half-billion dollars in federal aid for his venture capital firm.   The Center for Public Integrity discovered that since Westly raised the money for Obama, four companies in the portfolio of The Westly Group, his venture capital firm, received $510 million in loans, grants and stimulus money from the U.S. Department of Energy. And, the report added, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, on the White House’s recommendation, appointed Westly in August to the 12-member Secretary of Energy’s Advisory Board.

The sad reality is that Westly will look like a piker when Google is done ravishing the Treasury.  Google has entered the political ring siding itself clearly in the left’s corner.

Google is President Obama’s favorite corporation.

(more…)

It’s pure panic time in Democratic circles as the 40-year reign James Carville predicted seems to ending a few decades early.

MoveOn.org, a long-time Progressive powerhouse in DC and around the country, is running around with its hair on fire and preparing for a bad November.

And the group is currently trying to figure out what friends to save and which ones to toss overboard.  A September 4 e-mail to members said:

In this election we’ll focus on a handful of progressive heroes facing tough races, where we can make a real difference together. Which progressive heroes would you nominate to be our top priorities this fall?

It can be a long-time member of Congress or someone running for the House or Senate for the first time. He or she should be a proven progressive fighter, especially in standing up to corporate influence in Washington. And since we have limited resources, please nominate folks who are in truly close races where MoveOn members could swing the balance.

A few days later, MoveOn issued this e-mail:

Election Day is less than two months away, and we need to decide today whether we’ll have enough resources for a major campaign to help stop the Republicans and their corporate allies from taking over Congress.

In a survey over the weekend, 92% of MoveOn members said that we should work broadly to help Democratic candidates—especially now that corporate front groups are spending $400 million to boost Republicans’ chances.

But MoveOn went into full panic mode the next day, attempting to instill fear in its Big Government-loving members:

(more…)

Politicians, pundits, and citizens have long bemoaned the power that “special interests” wield in Washington, D.C. and state capitals across the nation. The pharmaceutical, energy, and defense industries and everyone in between employ armies of lobbyists to educate elected officials on their respective industry interests and to persuade them to protect said interests.  Other groups represent the concerns of a body of constituents, such as general taxpayer, second amendment, or pro-life groups.

Despite the soiling of the term “lobbyist,” particularly following the fall of Jack Abramoff, these activities are protected under the First Amendment – and rightfully so.  If it weren’t for second amendment groups, Chicago, where I currently dwell, would not have a powerful coalition challenging the city’s irrational, unconstitutional handgun ban in the Supreme Court. The majority of Americans own stock – stock in corporations.  In today’s legislative environment, corporations would do a disservice to their shareholders not to go to bat for their interests in the Beltway ball game.

(more…)