• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

If you go to the Democratic National Committee Web page and bounce around, you will find a section that
reads, “Federal election law requires political committees to report the
name, mailing address occupation and name of employer for each
individual whose contributions aggregate in excess of $200 in a calendar
year. Your contribution may be used in connection with Federal
elections and is subject to the limits and prohibitions of the Federal
Election Campaign Act.”

If you give money to the DNC, RNC, or any 501(c)-something, it has to
be reported. In the cloudy haze of campaign finance obfuscation, “Your
contribution may be used in connection with Federal elections and is
subject to the limits and prohibitions of the Federal Election Campaign
Act.”

But wait a minute. What if you contribute money not to a 501(c)(3)
or (4), but to a corporation? Hmmmmmm? What if a party (let’s say the
Democratic Party) were to form a corporation in one of the
corporation-mill venues like Delaware or Nevada? Could they do that?
Would they do that? Would such a simple procedural finesse
sidestep the FEC and the limiting and prohibiting restraints of the
Federal Election Act?

Reportedly, that is exactly what is commonplace. I confess only to
being in the early stages of research on this scam; but if even half of
what has been suggested is real, there is a potential litany of
questions longer than Bill Clinton’s Jane Doe file.

I have always had difficulty accepting the often-reported claim that
Republicans have reported to the FEC that they have raised more campaign
money than Democrats. The operative word apparently is “reported.”
I’ll follow up next week with answers to the questions I am seeking from
both Democrats and Republicans.

One source reports the DNC Services Corporation is no longer
registered in Delaware, but they were as recently as 1992. (Gee, they
moved in ’92. Bill Clinton … nah … it has to be a coincidence.)

Here is the short list of opening questions:

  1. Is it legal (letter of the law and spirit of the law) for
    a political party to create a for-profit corporation that launders money
    into political campaigns?

  2. If it is legal (or even if not), how does a party funnel the
    corporate money to the closely monitored campaigns?

  3. Is there a DNC Inc.? Was it established in Delaware? Where is it
    located now?

  4. Is there a GOP Inc.? If not, why?

  5. Who are the corporate officers and stockholders of such
    corporations if the corporations exist?

  6. How much money has been received by these corporations?

  7. How much money has been dispersed by the corporations for
    political purposes?

  8. What is the compensation of corporate officers?

  9. What is the profitability of the corporations?

  10. If there is nothing inappropriate about such a corporate entity,
    why has it been such a closely guarded secret?

So much of the political process is form over substance and
perception versus reality that it is very easy to anticipate the worst
intentions. We have been led to believe there is a deep, visceral and
very personal antipathy between Al Gore and Bill Bradley. However,
Bradley has been routinely missing obvious and juicy targets of
opportunity to destroy (not just challenge or undermine, but destroy)
the credibility, veracity and foundation of Al. G.W. Bush and John
McCain each have their own baggage, which neither seems inclined to
address. Alan Keyes seems to be the only candidate with the brass and
brains to address significant, salient issues, but he is being
marginalized by establishment co-conspirators in virtually every estate
(especially the once-vaunted fourth estate).

Check out what Madison said in “The Federalist” essay No. 45: “The
powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government
are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments
are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally
on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.
… The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all objects
which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties,
and properties of the people.”

“Few and defined …” Gosh, it seems none of the candidates,
or elected officials ever got the memo or read that essay.

The president’s recent State of the Union message was less that, than
a socialist wish list. Notwithstanding rhetoric to the contrary,
Clinton’s vision for your gubmint would precipitate legions of new,
yet-to-be-created government bureaucracies. Yeah, that means more, and
more, and more taxpayer money to fund those new “necessary” government
agencies.

I am constantly and consistently intrigued with the unbridled
hypocrisy of politicians. They all take an oath to “preserve and
protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,”
then inevitably rush to establish themselves as the very domestic
enemies of the Constitution they have sworn to protect us from.

As I was watching Clinton perform, I tried to scribble notes of his
lies, hypocrisy, duplicity and fraud. Before writer’s cramp reminded me
it would be less painful to take a highlighter to the transcript after
the fact, he actually surprised me. He was waxing on how he and his
co-conspirators had stood up to the powerful gun lobby (which by the way
ain’t that powerful) when he must have slipped on his own glibness.
While bragging about how he had gotten gun control passed (to the
benefit of criminals and bane of law abiding citizens) he actually said,
for God and everyone to hear, that they had “stood up to the American
people.” WHAT?!?! Yeah, further proof that your government not only
knows better than the poor slobs who elect them, but that the government
will jam whatever they want down your throat or some other bodily
orifice whether you like it or not.

The State of the Union Wish List was classic in both form and
substance to the dialectic model. Create a problem, exacerbate the
problem, and offer the manufactured state solution. William Pitt once
observed, “Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human
freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” And
he didn’t even know Billy-Jeff or Democrat/Socialist/Sleazoids.

Meanwhile, I still want to know what the DNC Services Corporation is
doing internationally, and why neither the FEC or the GOP seem to care.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.