I am reassessing my support of full disclosure of campaign contributions.

Largely for these reasons:

Like George Will, I am no longer convinced that I can trust the Left with that kind of information.

11 thoughts on “I am reassessing my support of full disclosure of campaign contributions.”

  1. Well better late than never Moe, I’ll say this for you, you are able to admit when you are wrong about something when you see new information.
    –
    I also used to be in full disclosure camp, but I stopped being in that camp a while ago, because I felt the left was going to use this information to try to stifle political speech.

    1. How about providing a reasonable alternative?
      .
      I believe we have a right to know who is behind political campaigns, but .. you’re right, the left may misuse this.
      .
      Alinsky offers a simple solution .. shame them.
      .
      Mew

      1. Donors to organizations that participate in Campaigns shouldn’t have to reveal themselves ( e.g. NEA, Chamber, AFP, Club for Growth etc.)
        The mission statement of each organization should suffice for the public.

        1. I presume they’re capable of understanding “Get the {copulation} out, you {cursed} dirty liberal!”.
          .
          I further presume Asimov’s statements on violence remain true.
          .
          Mew

  2. Reassessing? I reassessed when the LAT database was published with malice aforethought.

    1. Agreed, the argument about disclosure falls apart when we start seeing that information used to surpress people’s 1st Amendment rights to Free Speech.
      –
      This is also why the IRS Scandal is such a big deal and why the NSA issue isn’t a laughing matter as what some try to make it out to be.
      –
      If the government is willing to use the Department of Justice, the IRS (and Department of Treasury), the EPA, etc. as political weapons. It stands to reason that the government (particularly this administration), would be more than willing to use the NSA as a political weapon. That is why the NSA needs to be gone over with a fine-tooth comb.
      –
      I understand the need for the NSA, I actually had no problem with the NSA when Bush was in office, but then the Bush Administration wasn’t using parts of government like the IRS as political weapons against people that disagreed with him.
      –
      I think we’re at the point that if Democrats in congress had any trace of ethical thought left, they would be supporting Articles of Impeachment. Seriously, if Obama was really outraged about the behavior of the IRS, Lois Lerner would be in prison. He’s demonstrated that he’s perfectly okay with the IRS targetting his critics, and that’s downright scary.
      –
      I don’t envy whoever becomes President after Obama, because once trust is lost, it is very difficult to get it back.

      1. All the more reason to shrink the government, eh Garfield? The smaller the club, the less damaging.
        .
        Mew

        1. What we need to do is clean up the corruption and start holding people accountable.
          –
          People like to talk about Nixonian, well we’re way beyond Nixonian.

          1. How do you propose to do that? The corruption is endemic; that is, everyone with the power to fight the corruption is corrupt himself. Those few who try are marginalized and demonized to limit their power so that they cannot make any significant impact on the corruption.
            .
            Someone please prove me wrong……..

Comments are closed.