ترول ایرانی

گالری عکس

Posts tagged with “Liberal Interest Group Hypocrisy”

When It’s For Their Causes, Liberals Love Free-Spending Contributors

Interesting insight from this editorial in the Wall Street Journal.

Self-congratulation is rampant in New York after last week’s adoption of the state’s gay marriage statute. Among those who are the new toast of the town is the “group of super-rich Republican donors” (in the words of a certain Manhattan broadsheet) without whose financial backing the bill might not have passed.

It turns out that hedge fund operator Paul Singer, a prominent supporter of conservative causes, lent his checkbook and prestige to the gay marriage battle. He was joined by financiers Daniel Loeb and Cliff Asness. They underwrote a campaign that cost over $1 million to persuade four GOP state Senators to assure passage. A similar bill failed in 2009.

This news led our wry friends at the New York Sun to suggest a “thought experiment”: “How would the liberals have felt had there been a law in place requiring the taxpayers of New York to underwrite a campaign against the same-gender marriage law?” The question is rhetorical.

The Sun’s point is that the political left has spent years—no, decades—trying to impose limits on political campaign donations by the wealthy. Liberals prefer taxpayer financing of political campaigns. The left has been raging in particular against the Supreme Court for ruling last year in the Citizens United case that corporations and unions could donate to independent expenditure campaigns. There was more liberal outrage Monday as the Court struck down an Arizona law that provided matching funds to publicly financed candidates if their privately financed opponents exceeded a fund-raising limit.

Yet in New York, liberals are celebrating the huge independent political expenditures of Wall Street financiers because they support one of their favorite causes. Somehow in this case, the left has concluded that these big donors are contributing to democracy, not “hijacking” it. We welcome these liberals to the view that unlimited donations are a form of political free speech.

Russ Feingold must be unavailable for comment on this predicament.

Leave a Comment

Guess They Just Care a Little Less

Superfund, only “Super” to those who care I suppose.

For years, the Bush administration was criticized for not cleaning up enough of the nation’s most contaminated waste sites. The Obama administration plans to do even less.

Environmental groups and some Democratic lawmakers railed against President George W. Bush’s cleanup record. But this time, they’re shying away from speaking out against a popular president who’s considered an ally in the fight to clean up the environment.

In Obama’s first two years in office, the Environmental Protection Agency expects to begin the final phase of cleanup at fewer Superfund sites than in any administration since 1991, according to budget documents and agency records. The EPA estimates it will finish construction to remove the last traces of pollution at 20 sites in 2009 and 22 sites in 2010.

During the eight years of the Bush administration, the agency finished construction at 38 sites on average a year.

Word leaked from the environmental groups out on K Street is to shut up, grin, and bear it.  After all, their boy’s in the White House right now.

Hope and Change!

Leave a Comment