Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC

[InvisibleBallots]

The question - these corporations that support Bush and the Republicans are giving money to the DLC why? The goodness of their own hearts? Perhaps a sense of fair play? Or do they expect to get something for their cash?


http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=1435&forum=DCForumID34
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=11323&forum=DCForumID60#114

While the DLC will not formally disclose its sources of contributions and dues, the full array of its corporate supporters is contained in the program from its annual fall dinner last October, a gala salute to Lieberman that was held at the National Building Museum in Washington. Five tiers of donors are evident: the Board of Advisers, the Policy Roundtable, the Executive Council, the Board of Trustees, and an ad hoc group called the Event Committee--and companies are placed in each tier depending on the size of their check. For $5,000, 180 companies, lobbying firms, and individuals found themselves on the DLC's board of advisers, including British Petroleum, Boeing, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Coca-Cola, Dell, Eli Lilly, Federal Express, Glaxo Wellcome, Intel, Motorola, U.S. Tobacco, Union Carbide, and Xerox, along with trade associations ranging from the American Association of Health Plans to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. For $10,000, another 85 corporations signed on as the DLC's policy roundtable, including AOL, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Citigroup, Dow, GE, IBM, Oracle, UBS PacifiCare, PaineWebber, Pfizer, Pharmacia and Upjohn, and TRW.

And for $25,000, 28 giant companies found their way onto the DLC's executive council, including Aetna, AT&T, American Airlines, AIG, BellSouth, Chevron, DuPont, Enron, IBM, Merck and Company, Microsoft, Philip Morris, Texaco, and Verizon Communications. Few, if any, of these corporations would be seen as leaning Democratic, of course, but here and there are some real surprises. One member of the DLC's executive council is none other than Koch Industries, the privately held, Kansas-based oil company whose namesake family members are avatars of the far right, having helped to found archconservative institutions like the Cato Institute and Citizens for a Sound Economy. Not only that, but two Koch executives, Richard Fink and Robert P. Hall III, are listed as members of the board of trustees and the event committee, respectively--meaning that they gave significantly more than $25,000.

The DLC board of trustees is an elite body whose membership is reserved for major donors, and many of the trustees are financial wheeler-dealers who run investment companies and capital management firms--though senior executives from a handful of corporations, such as Koch, Aetna, and Coca-Cola, are included. Some donate enormous amounts of money, such as Bernard Schwartz, the chairman and CEO of Loral Space and Communications, who single-handedly finances the entire publication of Blueprint, the DLC's retooled monthly that replaced The New Democrat. "I sought them out, after talking to Michael Steinhardt," says Schwartz. "I like them because the DLC gives resonance to positions on issues that perhaps candidates cannot commit to."

[stpalm]

1. such is modern politics

to paraphrase Cicero:

"The sinews of politics are infinite money"

[w4rma]

4. I wish it were only modern. This graft has been around since the beginning

of society.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stpalm]

26. holy shit!

calm down, dude- I thought it was just an observation of mine. I am obviously concerned about this, but I don't need to go into histrionics to prove it.

[wyldwolf]

30. what a site, Eloriel! You getting physically violent with someone!

[Tinoire]

31. Is that so? Care to point out where?

I could literally be physically violent about now (which for me would rise to the level of about kicked shins)

Yeah... people must literally be trembling at their key-boards

:scared:

[wyldwolf]

33. why should I point out where when you just did?

I could literally be physically violent about now (which for me would rise to the level of about kicked shins)

And that would literally be a site! Really quite funny!

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wyldwolf]

46. you're right! It would be a funny site!

[InvisibleBallots]

48. yes! and I would laugh myself silly!

God Damn I hope it happens soon! :) :)

[wyldwolf]

49. as would I!

it would be hysterical! Circus-like.

I hope it happens soon, too!

[InvisibleBallots]

42. RIGHT ON Eloriel!

I couldn't agree more! :) I'd buy a ticket to watch you kick some ass!

[jfern]

56. Actually, it's pretty recent that corporations have this much power

Before the 1886 Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific SCOTUS ruling, they had far less power.

[BrklynLiberal]

2. That information needs to be read by every Democrat before deciding

if the DLC should have any influence in the direction of the party.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. Eli Lily

was one of the companies mentioned in a book I read in 1968, called "Who Rules America?" The book was about the influence of drug and insurance companies on US policies. The reason Lily's name has stuck in my mind was because they were headquartered in Indiana (I lived in Illinois at the time). I find it interesting that the power players of 36 years ago are still there, and probably stronger.

[madfloridian]

5. Paragraphs that tells WHY we are in Iraq...from the DLC site.

I found this while exploring the Talking points section which Hedda found. This is the heart of progressive internationalism, just like the PNAC goals of making Iraq the gateway.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=124&subid=158&contentid=252439

PPI | Front & Center | March 9, 2004
Let's Get Serious About Democracy in the Greater Middle East
By Ronald D. Asmus and Michael McFaul

A bipartisan consensus is emerging in America about the need to help bring greater freedom and democracy to the Greater Middle East. It is from this region that the most imminent threats to Western security are likely to emanate in the 21st century. It is here that the dangerous mix of extremist ideologies, terrorism, and access to weapons of mass destruction is most likely to occur. And it is certainly no accident that the most dangerous part of the world where the war on terrorism will be won or lost is also the least free.

The war on terrorism cannot be won militarily. It must be won politically and with ideas. We need a grand strategy to help these countries transform themselves into the kinds of societies that focus on the needs of their peoples -- ones that do not produce people who want to kill us and have the capacity to do so. Unless we help the Greater Middle East resolve its own internal pathologies, we will not stem the root causes of terrorism.

That is why both George W. Bush and his Democratic rivals are now talking about the need to bring greater freedom, justice, and democracy to this region. A growing number of European leaders are also embracing the view that peaceful democratic regime change in the region today can help eliminate the need for military preemption tomorrow.

A serious strategy of democracy promotion in the Greater Middle East must do three things -- support democrats in the region, create the regional context for democratic development, and reorganize ourselves at home to effectively pursue and sustain these policies..."

AND here you go...this is why we are still in Iraq...it is policy of our Democrats as well.

SNIP..."Nothing would set back the democratic cause in the region more than a premature American disengagement from Iraq, where a critical democratic transition is now underway. Irrespective of whether one supported or opposed the war, we all have
a strategic interest in seeing Iraq's experiment in building a more just and democratic society succeed -- and we must hold the Bush Administration to its commitment to stay the course in Baghdad..."

[Selatius]

6. Hmm

we all have
a strategic interest in seeing Iraq's experiment in building a more just and democratic society succeed -- and we must hold the Bush Administration to its commitment to stay the course in Baghdad...

Hmm, "strategic interest" you say? Gee, I wonder what the hell that could be.

[madfloridian]

7. Well, what comes to mind is Naomi Klein's article, I think.

I have it saved. Was it Fruits of Baghdad or Neocon paradise? Will find it and post.

Same goals, same profit.

[madfloridian]

8. Aha, I found the article I wanted. Same goals Dems and GOP?

This is very long, will need to be read in sections. It is very telling and
very researched by a reputable magazine.
http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.html
Baghdad Year Zero
Pillaging Iraq in pursuit of a neocon utopia
Posted on Friday, September 24, 2004. Originally from Harper's Magazine,
September 2004. By Naomi Klein.
It was only after I had been in Baghdad for a month that I found what I was
looking for. I had traveled to Iraq a year after the war began, at the
height of what should have been a construction boom, but after weeks of
searching I had not seen a single piece of heavy machinery apart from tanks
and humvees. Then I saw it: a construction crane. It was big and yellow and
impressive, and when I caught a glimpse of it around a corner in a busy
shopping district I thought that I was finally about to witness some of the
reconstruction I had heard so much about. But as I got closer I noticed that
the crane was not actually rebuilding anything—not one of the bombed-out
government buildings that still lay in rubble all over the city, nor one of
the many power lines that remained in twisted heaps even as the heat of
summer was starting to bear down. No, the crane was hoisting a giant
billboard to the top of a three-story building. SUNBULAH: HONEY 100%
NATURAL, made in Saudi Arabia. ...."End of the Snip.

[GreenPartyVoter]

9. No surprise there. :^(

[greenohio]

10. Here let me help the witch hunt

Chuck Schumer corp donations
1 Goldman Sachs $281,590
2 Citigroup Inc $241,100
3 JP Morgan Chase & Co $158,550
4 Credit Suisse First Boston $154,794
5 Merrill Lynch $147,000
6 UBS Americas $140,500
7 Bear Stearns $140,400
8 Metropolitan Life $122,499
9 Morgan Stanley $119,500
10 Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co $116,000
11 Lehman Brothers $114,500
12 Ernst & Young $105,050
13 Kasowitz, Benson et al $100,250
14 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu $97,749
15 KPMG LLP $82,948
16 Paul, Weiss et al $77,000
17 Viacom Inc $74,700
18 New York Life Insurance $73,000
19 Bank of New York $72,499
20 Bank of America $70,600

Barbra Boxer
Time Warner $58,350
Viacom Inc $35,000
Cisco Systems $24,850
Sony Corp of America $23,000
Walt Disney Co $20,250
YankeeNets $20,000
Vivendi Universal $18,749

Howard Dean
Time Warner $78,736
Microsoft Corp $52,122
IBM Corp $39,335
Morgan Stanley $29,350
Citigroup Inc $26,386
Goldman Sachs $24,500
Viacom Inc $22,750
News Corp $20,650

We really should attack everyone receiving money from big international corporations. Don't you think?

[InvisibleBallots]

11. that would be a start

Hey, greenohio, you have any stats about who traditional Democratic groups donated to, say, the AFL-CIO, NOW, NAACP, ACLU, and maybe the new groups like MoveOn, DFA, PFA, and TrueMajority?

[FightinNewDem]

13. Funny...

MoveOn doesn't disclose its finances to the public. Neither does PDA, or the Campaign for Americas's Future, or the Center for American Progress.

But nobody ever makes so much as a peep about their shadowy finances.

[Tinoire]

16. Well go ahead. Be the first to make a peep. Breathlessly waiting

Breathlessly waiting to see what you've uncovered about their "shadowy finances". Links would be nice.

Surely you don't think progressives are so blindly devoted that we wouldn't dump those organizations in a heartbeat if your claims were substantiated? Unlike the right, we don't goose-step.

So please. I'd love to see what you've uncovered.

Go ahead FightinNewDem, make that peep!

[FightinNewDem]

18. Waiting for facts, that's all

I won't peep, because I don't know who funds these groups. However, I strongly suspect that they have not sworn off corporate contributions cold turkey.

[madfloridian]

21. You always misunderstand.

All groups have some corporate financing, it is the fact that the DLC in the words of Rosenberg himself was created to do away with their dependence on the traditional interest groups of the Democrats.

And if they don't need our money, they don't have to answer to us at all.

The quote is all over the internet, so I am sure you can find it.

There are many threads here on the subject. I can find them easily. There is nothing wrong with moderate funding from any one group. Everyone does that.

But DLC was founded for corporation donations...they needed the money. Then they did not need the people.

[Tinoire]

28. Well, in the interest of eliminating "conspiracy theories"

maybe you should do a little research and base your theory on factual evidence :shrug:

The topic at hand though is the DLC. What do you think of their documented and extremely shadowy financing & their corporate loyalties? Any thoughts on that?

[FightinNewDem]

34. Oooooh, shadowy!

There's nothing shadowy about it.

At this very moment, I am holding the program from the 2002 DLC National Conversation. The list of sponsors is on pages 20 and 21. If they are trying to be shadowy, they probably shouldn't have included this in the table of contents.

And you might also be interested to know that at last summer's Democratic National Convention, they DLC partnered with two labor unions for their big party at Ned Devine's in Boston. The Sheet Metal Workers and the International Association of Firefighters (a union which works closely with the DLC) joined the DLC for the event.

[Tinoire]

37. Any thoughts about their corporate funding noted in the original post

or do you prefer to try to distract from it by clinging to a list of event sponsors on pages 20 & 21 of some stupid pamphlet they printed?

Any thoughts about Koch Industries, "privately held, Kansas-based oil company whose namesake family members are avatars of the far right, having helped to found archconservative institutions like the Cato Institute and Citizens for a Sound Economy", being on the DLC's executive council?

Any thoughts about Bernard Schwartz, "the chairman and CEO of Loral Space and Communications," single-handedly financing the entire publication of the DLC's magazing "Blueprint"?

Any thoughts about the loyalty oaths they ask Democratic politicians to take for their corporate whoring?

"To ensure that liberals don't slip through the cracks, NDN requires each politician who seeks entree to its largesse and contacts to fill out a questionnaire that asks his or her views on trade, economics, education, welfare reform, and other issues. The questions are detailed, forcing candidates to state clearly whether or not they support views associated with the New Democrat Coalition, and it concludes by asking, "Will you join the NDC when you come to Congress?""

http://www.prospect.org/print-friendly/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html

Any thoughts at all? Or do you consider those 'good things'?

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tinoire]

40. I repeat. Loyalty oaths.

"To ensure that liberals don't slip through the cracks, NDN requires each politician who seeks entree to its largesse and contacts to fill out a questionnaire that asks his or her views on trade, economics, education, welfare reform, and other issues. The questions are detailed, forcing candidates to state clearly whether or not they support views associated with the New Democrat Coalition, and it concludes by asking, "Will you join the NDC when you come to Congress?""

Still no thoughts about the DLC's corporate funding as noted in the original post? Or are distractionary tangents more your style?


(I put it in bold for you because you seem to have trouble either reading or focusing.)

[FightinNewDem]

43. You'te "mexing your missages"

The NDN is not the same as the DLC. The NDN is a congressional caucus, the DLC is a private advocacy organization.

So they ask prospective members their views on issues. Big frigging deal. Democracy for America asks prospective beneficiaries to complete a questionairre. So does NARAL. So does the AFL-CIO. The NEA. The Teamsters. 21st Century Democrats.

It's a centrist group, for god's sake.

And as I said before, if you aren't upset about Barbara Boxer and Russ Feingold taking corporate money, then I am not fazed by the DLC taking corporate money. It's the same damn thing.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tinoire]

53. The DLC and the NDOL are the same. Fiddlesticks for your fine line

I see, no thoughts- just an attempt to white-wash that obscenity. This is very tiresome. If you can't see a difference between Boxer and Feingold getting a few pennies from a few corporations (and it would be most interesting to see just WHAT corporations you're trying to liken to the Right-wing corporations that fund the DLC) and the DLC being funded by, beholden by, and working in concert with the same corporations working to destroy the Democratic Party, then we have no conversation. I beg you to excuse me while I go on to the more productive work of taking my party back by helping to expose the DLC's co-habitation with the enemies of everything the Democratic Party used to stand for.


DLC AND NDN
Two acronyms that junkies know and that Democratic candidates hear in their sleep. The Democratic Leadership Council, chaired these days by Sen. Evan Bayh and run for 17 years by its founding director, Al From, is the spawning ground of moderate “Third Way” thinking in the party. Bill Clinton was chairman when he launched his own presidential bid in 1991. The New Democratic Network is the DLC’s overtly political cousin, run by an operative named Simon Rosenberg. It doles out cash to candidates and, increasingly, supports independent spending efforts.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/834591.asp?0bl=-0&cp1=1
==

About the NDN


The New Democrat Network (NDN) is one of the nation’s most influential political organizations.
NDN promotes a new generation of leaders who advocate economic growth and fiscal responsibility, strong American leadership in world affairs and world markets, a smaller, smarter government, and a progressive approach to social issues that respects family, faith, and community.

<snip>

NDN is led by NDN President Simon Rosenberg, with advice from NDN's Advisory Board, a group of leading New Democratic thinkers and strategists. NDN’s Advisory Board includes former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joseph J. Andrew, pollster and Latino electorate expert Sergio Bendixen, former Army Secretary Louis Caldera, former Member of Congress and Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Vic Fazio, former Member of Congress and Chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council Dave McCurdy, former White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry, former White House Chief of Staff Mack McLarty, and former Federal Trade Commissioner and White House Cabinet Secretary Christine A. Varney.
------------------------------

The NDN was founded in 1996 by Senator Joe Lieberman, chairman of the DLC. "NDN acts as a political venture capital fund," a special type of political action committee among political action committees. NDN raises PAC money from many sectors, which they then distribute to their top federal candidates -- Lucas received $10,000 from them. NDN also provides a mechanism for fat-cats to donate directly to candidates without worrying about all those pesky Election Commission limits. Clinton campaign aide, Simon Rosenberg, is now NDN's President. Joe Lieberman is chairman.

The DLC does the same thing, actually. But, by forming the NDN, the DLC can contribute more than twice as much to favored candidates.
===

When Lieberman co-founded a campaign group called the New Democrat Network in 1996 to raise money for centrist Democratic candidates, drugmakers and health insurers stepped in as major supporters.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45c/219.html

"You could argue that Joe Lieberman has done more to help get the Democratic Party right on tech issues than any other member of Congress," said NDN president Simon Rosenberg, who co-founded the group with Lieberman. "On a whole host of issues, he's been there."

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-244175.html?legacy=cnet

An offshoot of the DLC and PPI is The New Democrat Network(NDN).<7> The NDN was founded in 1996 by Senator Joe Lieberman, as chairman of the DLC. The NDN "acts as a political venture capital fund to create a new generation of elected officials eager to lead the U.S. and the world into the 21st century and the Internet Age. NDN is committed to electing political leaders who are capable of realizing the great promise of the new century while ensuring that no one is left behind."

NDN has about 65 members in the House and 16 in the Senate. Generally speaking, the function of the NDN is to act as the DLC's political action committee and launder soft money to favored Congressional campaign committees.

http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/fron328.htm

[Geek_Girl]

78. Does the DLC really

ask for Loyalty oaths from candidates?

[FightinNewDem]

86. This is nuts

The DLC does not demand loyalty oaths from candidates.

The DLC does not even really deal with candidates. It works with elected officials, mainly on the state level. It does NOT provide funds to candidates. It is a combination think tank/advocacy group/networking organization.

[InvisibleBallots]

47. hey - I'm holding the current copy on DLC "Blueprints" right now!

you are right! They SHAMELESSLY whore themselves out to corporations, and proudly list them in their magazine! Yet another reason I will always vote against them!

[wyldwolf]

50. apparently, the non-DLC dems listed in this thread...

...hide their corporate contributions? :shrug:

[InvisibleBallots]

44. hey Tinoire, aside from Soros' filthy money...

which I wish MoveOn and the rest would return immediately - I have no problem with any of these groups - true, grassroots, democratic organizations. I'll give them my money LONG LONG before I'd give it to the whores in the DLC.

[Tinoire]

55. true, grassroots, democratic organizations

True, grassroots, democratic organizations all the way.

I'm not even giving money to the DNC anymore- only to speficic candidates and progressive Pacs that still stand for the people's interests.

[InvisibleBallots]

59. I'm giving my money to DFA and PFA

I'm not ready to throw out the DNC with the DLC bathwater - YET - but I'm getting damn close. As long as the AFL-CIO is still okay with the DNC, so am I. But my patience is stretched very thin, no doubt.

[Eloriel]

14. Dishonest

I've sure seen more of you in the past two days than at any time previously, Greenohio. Not overly crazy about the comments I've seen friom you so far and this one, for example, is especially troublesome. In fact, I call it downright dishonest. (But that's okay, I see a lot of dishonest posts where Howard Dean comes up as a subject, and I see you bringing him up and/or responding to threads with him mentioned a lot.)

Interesting too that you had this information so close at hand but didn't bother to post a link, isn't it? Must've been an oversight on your part.

Okay. First, corporations of and by themselves cannot contribute directly to political campaigns, not legally anyway. So your little lists are already misleading without that explanation provided. Of course, this information is compiled because INDIVIDUALS who make contributions must list their employer -- which means anyone from the CEO and other top execs at, say, Viacomm, to the most newly hired hourly security guard will be listed from the same company. Again, can be very misleading. In Barbara Boxer's case, there might have been 20 individuals from YankeeNets giving $100 each for the $20K you have listed. Or 10 top execs and Boardmembers giving the full $2K each. We don't know from your, um, "data."

I really don't know about the others you listed, but in Howard Dean's case he received his campaign funds overwhelmingly from individuals at $5 to the maximum $2000 a clip, MOST of it well, well under $100 a contribution (tho many of us contibuted our little bits as many times as we could afford to up to the $2K limit). So as an avid Howard Dean supporter, I really resent your misleading and utterly dishonest post.
All probably unintentional, right?

Now why not post the link and let's please hereafter try to be considerably more intellectually HONEST about such things and/or do a better (more complete and thorough) job of research and scholarship, eh?

[FightinNewDem]

19. Quit avoiding the issue

The New Democrat bashers love to make a big fuss over the DLC's acceptance of corporate contributions. If it is somehow loathsome for Al From to accept corporate money, tell us why it is ok for Russ Feingold, Howard Dean or Barbara Lee to do so?

Lose the double standards, and your case would be a hell of a lot more convincing.

And while you're at it, tell me why DFA accepted thousands of dollars from Fisher Scientific? Fisher Scientific is the sugardaddy of a nasty outfit in NH that has lobbied against a progressive tax system in the state.

[madfloridian]

23. You never read our posts. You just get angry without reading.

All groups have some corporate financing, it is the fact that the DLC in the words of Rosenberg himself was created to do away with their dependence on the traditional interest groups of the Democrats.

And if they don't need our money, they don't have to answer to us at all.

The quote is all over the internet, so I am sure you can find it.

There are many threads here on the subject. I can find them easily. There is nothing wrong with moderate funding from any one group. Everyone does that.

But DLC was founded for corporation donations...they needed the money. Then they did not need the people.

Hey, you wanta play the who gave what game? We can do that as well.

[FightinNewDem]

25. Tell me this, then...

If people like Dean and Boxer are so grassroots oriented, if they don't need to accept corporate cash, then why do they take it anyway?

Hold your heroes to the same standard as your boogeymen.

[madfloridian]

57. When the DLC info is available, then I can compare.

I have been through the donors to DFA, and also to the Dean Campaign. Very few corporate donors, and very small donations in comparison to other campaigns.

I don't know why you asked me about Boxer. I have not kept up with her.

I do know for sure that the DFA contributions are far more grassroots than DLC, and if you want to prove differently....do so.

I tried to find funding information for them, but I can't see it listed. They are either not required, or I am a sorry researcher. Perhaps you could help me out.

I am going to find the articles that mention the reasons for their founding.

[madfloridian]

62. They wanted to be "ideologically freed" from the party base.

http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html

Simon Rosenberg, the former field director for the DLC who directs the New Democrat Network, a spin-off political action committee, says, "We're trying to raise money to help them lessen their reliance on traditional interest groups in the Democratic Party. In that way," he adds, "they are ideologically freed, frankly, from taking positions that make it difficult for Democrats to win."

A Business-Led Party

Freeing Democrats from being, well, Democrats has been the Democratic Leadership Council's mission since its founding 16 years ago by Al Gore, Chuck Robb, and a handful of other conservative, mostly southern Dems as a rump faction of disaffected elected officials and party activists. Producing and directing the DLC is Al From, its founder and CEO, who's been the leader, visionary, and energizing force behind the New Democrat movement since Day One. A veteran of the Carter White House and Capitol Hill, where he'd worked for Louisiana Representative Gillis Long and served as executive director of the House Democratic Caucus, From helped build the Committee on Party Effectiveness, a forerunner of the DLC, in the early 1980s. To From, a key rationale for establishing the DLC in those days was to protect the Democrats' eroding bastion in the South against mounting Republican gains, and indeed one of the DLC's chief projects in the 1980s was to create and promote the Super Tuesday primary across the South, aimed at enhancing the clout of southern Dems in selecting presidential candidates.

Privately funded and operating as an extraparty organization without official Democratic sanction, and calling themselves "New Democrats," the DLC sought nothing less than the miraculous: the transubstantiation of America's oldest political party. Though the DLC painted itself using the palette of the liberal left--as "an effort to revive the Democratic Party's progressive tradition," with New Democrats being the "trustees of the real tradition of the Democratic Party"--its mission was far more confrontational. With few resources, and taking heavy flak from the big guns of the Democratic left, the DLC proclaimed its intention, Mighty Mouse–style, to rescue the Democratic Party from the influence of 1960s-era activists and the AFL-CIO, to ease its identification with hot-button social issues, and, perhaps most centrally, to reinvent the party as one pledged to fiscal restraint, less government, and a probusiness, pro–free market outlook...."

[greenohio]

65. "our posts".... who is this we? Is this some type of cult or something?

[InvisibleBallots]

70. you're supposed to mention Rev. Moon

When you slander Dean fans as "cultists" - you are supposed to mention Rev. Moon, greenohio - didn't you get the memo? :shrug:

[greenohio]

60. This is all public information. Do you have proof any of its wrong?

Apparently not, just conjecture and attacks on character. Many of these corporations set up pacs to make their donations for them.... a fact you conveniently left out. You really shouldn't be dishonest like that. I cannot give a link, as the information is on paper. But I am sure you can find it internet if you look.

My point is still valid. There are MANY MANY Democrats who accept money from corporations (via pac and execs). Have fun burning them all at the stake.

[FightinNewDem]

17. While we're at it...

...let's see if any of the DU demigods and demigoddesses have tainted their souls with corporate cash. I'm sure they would never stoop to such horrid levels!

Russ Feingold:

Air Conditioning Contractors of America
Alliant Energy
American Hospital Association
Anheuser-Busch
Associated Milk Producers
BellSouth
Daimler-Chrysler
General Electric
General Motors
Joy Global Inc.
Lamar Corporation
Land O'Lakes, Inc.
Major League Baseball
Mattell
Metlife
Microsoft
Miller Brewing
National Beer Wholesalers Association
New York Mercantile Exchange
Premier Inc.
S.C. Johnson
SBC Communication
Sony Pictures
Sprint Corporation
TDS Telecommunications
Time-Warner
Title Industry PAC
Universal Studios
Wells Fargo
Winston & Strawn
Wisconsin Hospital Association



Lynn Woolsey:

Abbott Laboratories
Allianz Life Insurance Company
Alexander & Baldwin, Inc.
Allied Grape Growers
American Bankers Association
American Crystal Sugar Company
American Sugarbeet Growers Association
California Beet Growers Association (she's good for beets, evidently)
Calpine Corporation
CH2M Hill Companies
Edison International
MCI
National Assoc. of Insurance and Financial Advisors
National Association of Realtors
PG&E Corporation
Wine and Spirit Wholesalers of America
Wine Institute

Barbara Lee:

AFLAC
Alexander & Baldwin, Inc.
American Crystal Sugar Company
American Sugar Cane League
CLEAR CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS!!!!!!!!!
Countrywide Financial
MCI
Parsons Corporation
PG&E Corp.
Providian Financial
Shaw Group, Inc.
Smith Kline Beecham
Southwest Airlines
Wells Fargo
World Savings Bank


Jim McDermott:

Boeing
H&R Block
Maritrans GP Inc.
Microsoft
National Association of Realtors
Quest Diagnostics, Inc.
Saltchuk Resources, Inc.
Schering Plough
Tasty Baking Company


Ted Kennedy:

AFLAC
American Staffing Association
Amgen, Inc.
Boston Scientific
Blue Cross-Blue Shield
Brown and Company
Delta Dental Plans
Group Health, Inc.
Hillenbrand Industries
Johnson & Johnson
Keyspan Energy
Medtronics, Inc.
Medco Health Solutions, Inc.
Novartis Corporation
Providian Financial
SBC Communications
United Liquors Ltd.
Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

References are to each corporations political action committee.

All info cortesy of Political Money Line:
http://www.tray.com

Info is also available at:
http://www.fec.gov

[LetsGoMurphys]

67. Ted Kennedy:

United Liquors Ltd. He is askin for it with that one lol.

[wyldwolf]

32. Howard Dean and Rupert Murdoch for $20,650!

LOL!

[wyldwolf]

35. greenohio, isn't it funny...

... how everytime someone digs up "dirt" on the DLC, it's discovered that their guys are guilty of the same "dirt?" But then the dirt diggers either fall silent or offer some pretty lame spin and justifications.

[FightinNewDem]

36. Hmmm

It got quiet, didn't it?

[wyldwolf]

38. I can hear the crickets

[greenohio]

64. Chirp Chirp

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FightinNewDem]

79. Don't forget to mention PNAC!

[moggie12]

93. Oh shoot...

I hate to sound ignorant, but I'm not up on my lingo. What's PNAC (obviously, it's bad...)

Actually, although I couldn't resist writing that, the anti-DLC folks have a point on a couple of issues. I don't subscribe to the conspiratorial aspects of their arguments, but I wish some of the Party bigwigs weren't so deeply tied to the Wall Street folks (on stuff like stock options, hedge fund regulation, e.g.). One night this week I'm going to post some really obnoxious-sounding "DLC-focused" post and see if I can trick everybody into having a non-fisticuffs type of discussion. (Along with those pesky facts.)

[greenohio]

81. ROFLAO!!!!!!

Now that, is funny. Great post.

[moggie12]

92. What's a ROFLOA? n/t

[wyldwolf]

85. CLASSIC!

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. My dad

was a history teacher for 40 years. He used to say that historically, corporations would donate to both parties to avoid the appearance pf partisanship.

[moggie12]

77. My dad was also a social studies teacher

And like yours, was a smart guy. He was a bit more cynical though. He said it was because they wanted to be "in good" with everyone in light of see-sawing election cycles/victories.

[leesa]

20. What a surprise! I tell you I'm just flabbergasted!

You mean the DLC is composed of corporate whores? I'm shocked!

[FightinNewDem]

22. By your standard...

...it's a crowded whorehouse.

Tell me how Boxer, Feingold, Lee, et al can accept bundles of corporate cash and not be considered "whores"?

[Tinoire]

24. Richard Fink , right wing rat, huge DLC fund-raiser &... advisor

In October 2000, the DLC held a corporate fundraising event bankrolled by Koch Industries, the largest privately held oil company in America, and a big source of funding of the Cato Institute and every other New Right think-tank in Washington. The guru of the event was Richard Fink, director of political projects of Koch Industries and a board member of both the Koch family's charitable foundations and the DLC's think-tank, the Progressive Policy Institute. Joining Fink on the planning committee for the big corporate fundraiser were Robert P. Hall III, another Koch Industries exec, and Michael Lewan, a lobbyist for Enron and other mega-corporations, and the former chief of staff of Joe Lieberman, during his first term in the Senate. Lewan brought Lieberman to the attention of the DLC, shortly after the former Connecticut Attorney General beat incumbent Republican Lowell Weicher with a large infusion of cash from the William F. Buckley family of right-wing Republicans, and from even more radical right-wing Cuban exiles in Miami, Florida.

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Democratic_Leadership_Council

====

An example of what the DLC gives the right-wing in return...


-- DLC KANSAS GOVERNOR BRINGS IN KOCH INDUSTRIES ADVISOR FOR BUDGET CUTS.

Gov. Kathleen Sibelius, a Democrat and darling of the Democratic Leadership Council, has appointed an economist from Koch Industries to preside over the review of how to respond to the economic depression and budget crisis by slashing state services and raising taxes. Koch Industries, the largest privately-held American oil company, is a major funder of Conservative Revolution institutions and rightist Republican politics.

Koch economist Art Hall, now on loan to the state government, is expected to "question everything" in Kansas services and other spending. Asked why she would take an advisor from a company which has funded Republicans, including her opponent in the gubernatorial race last year, Gov. Sibelius said defensively, "He is really my person in this administration, not directed by the leadership in Koch."

In fact, without public fanfare, Koch Industries has funded the Democratic Leadership Council in recent years. In October 2000, the DLC held a big fundraising event which Koch helped plan. Koch executive vice president Richard Fink and one other Koch officer attended and contributed heavily to the DLC. And Fink went on the board of the Progressive Policy Institute, the think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council.

This same Fink runs the political donations of the Koch family; he founded the "Citizens for A Sound Economy" and poured Koch money into sponsoring "Austrian economics" and George Mason University.

(snip)

source: AP in Lawrence World-Journal, June 30, 2003, interviews

http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:H6AvTHCRjPkJ:agapic-smurf.diaryland.com/+%22DLC%22+%22Richard+Fink%22&hl=en

About "Citizens for A Sound Economy"
The CSE is a Washington-based think tank founded by ((the ultraconservative))David and Charles Koch. Charles Koch also co-founded the Cato Institute.
Current Chairman (July 2004) is Dick Armey, former Republican House Majority Leader.

The following excerpt is from Lawsuit Against Clean Air Act By Members of Congress Raises Conflict-of-Interest Questions by Curtis Moore for The Public i, an investigative report from the Center for Public Integrity. It describes how C. Boyden Gray of the CSE, the Federalist Society, and other members of the conservative movement have engineered what appears to be a severe rollback of Congressional authority to regulate industry. The case in question is American Trucking Assocation, Inc., v. EPA:

"...Based in Washington, D.C., CSE describes itself as an organization of "grassroots citizens dedicated to free markets and limited government." However, it is commonly known as what Public Relations Quarterly has called a "corporate front group." The publication explained that "the use of such 'front groups' enables corporations to take part in public debates and government hearings behind a cover of community concern (in order to) oppose environmental regulations, and to introduce policies that enhance corporate profitability."

http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipients/cse.htm


CSE is often described as a "consumer group," but according to internal documents leaked to the Washington Post, 85 percent of its 1998 funding came from major corporations.

CSE has been criticised by the Nader-founded group, the Government Accountability Project (GAP), as lacking independence. In 2000 GAP spokesperson Gary Ruskin told the Washington Post, "It's part of a rent-a-mouthpiece phenomenon. ... There are mercenary groups that function as surrogates when industry feels it's not advantageous for it to speak directly."

(snip)

CSE boasts close ties to Republicans. Its website carries an endorsement from George W. Bush: "Folks, you've got to get to know this organization ... They have been doing a great job all over the country educating people."



Florida Congresswoman Katherine Harris - best known for her role as Florida's Secretary of State during the 2000 Presidential election - also endorses CSE, calling it "one of the most effective grassroots lobbying organizations around--anywhere."

CSE says its current priorities are advancing what its calls its "Freedom Agenda" comprising "fundamental tax reform", ending "lawsuit abuse", "work, not welfare", "school choice", "privacy" and shifting social security to the responsibility of the individual.

(snip)

According to Media Transparency, between 1985 and 2002, CSEF received $16,928,712 in 108 separate grants from only twelve foundations:

Castle Rock Foundation
Earhart Foundation
JM Foundation
Koch Family Foundations (David H. Koch Foundation, Charles G. Koch Foundation, Claude R. Lambe Foundation)
John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.
Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
Philip M. McKenna Foundation, Inc.
Scaife Foundations (Scaife Family, Sarah Mellon Scaife, Carthage) <17> (http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=395)
In 2002, CSEF gained $920,000 in grants from three of these foundations, accounting for a little under one-quarter of the organisation's revenue. The Claude R. Lambe Foundation was the most generous contributing $700,000 for general operating costs while the Scaife Foundation donated $175,000 and the John M. Olin Foundation $45,000.

Other CSE funders (not included in above funding total) have included:

Archer Daniels Midland
Daimler Chrysler ($25,000)
Enron
General Electric
Koch Industries
F.M. Kirby Foundation
Philip Morris (>$1 million)
U.S. West ($1 million)
ExxonMobil ($75,000)
Exxon ($175,000)
Hertz ($25,000)
Microsoft ($380,000)
U.S. Sugar Corp. ($280,000)
(source: The Washington Post, 1/29/00)

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Citizens_for_a_Sound_Economy

Front page of the CSE's web-site today:

The Liberal Backlash Begins


Jan 5. The machinery of the Left-- from the AARP to Big Labor-- are mobilizing millions of dollars to fight President Bush and his plan to save the Social Security program. FreedomWorks needs your help to counter them! MORE INFO

[DaveinMD]

27. wow

corporations give to both parties. I can't believe it.

[wyldwolf]

29. ...and Howard Dean

Wanna talk corporate contributions?

Three times in 2003, one Robert Crandall of Dallas, TX, contributed $2000. to the Dean campaign. Robert Crandall who, since the 1980 election cycle, has made political contributions as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of American Airlines and the Chairman Emeritus of AMR Corporation. The same Dallas-based Robert Crandall who serves on the Halliburton Board of Directors.

Dean amassed over $110,000 in donations in the first four months of his campaign from people with ties to the Fund for a Healthy America, a Vermont utility group.

David Gram of the Associated Press reported: “One donor who gave Dean's PAC the maximum amount allowed- $5,000 is Robert Young a top official at two utility companies that have had a lot of important business before state government during Dean's nearly 11 years in office. Young is chief executive at Central Vermont Public Service Corp. and chairman of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.”

Young, it seems, plays both sides, too. Not only did he donate to Dean and and DFA, he also donated to Bush and the Vermont Republican Federal Elections Committee.

[FightinNewDem]

41. Let the Purge Commence!

Here are more corporate drones, who must be banished from the party, lest they put their corporate masters before the revolution:

LORAL SPACECOM:

Barbara Boxer
Ed Markey
Barbara Mikulski
Nita Lowey

ELI LILY:

Zoe Lofgren
Diana Degette
Chris Dodd
Carrie Meek
Bobby Rush
Danny Davis

BOEING:

Ed Pastor
Barbara Boxer (again? has she no shame?)
Lois Capps
John Larson
Steny Hoyer
Ben Chandler
Charles Schumer
Ron Wyden

COCA-COLA:

Stephanie Tubbs Jones
David Wu
Sheila Jackson Lee
Bob Menendez
Bennie Thompson
Bill Jefferson
Barack Obama
John Lewis
Hilda Solis

[Q]

52. Why are Democrats even arguing with the DLCers?

As far as I'm concerned...Democrats shouldn't argue with DLCers over control the party...just refuse to vote for them. Of course the DLC will try to defend themselves by smearing other Democrats. That's SOP for them. If you accuse them of being corporate whores...their comeback will always be that they're not the ONLY corporate whores.

The bottom line is that the New Democrats are trying to transform our party into a 'new' party that isn't in any way beholden to the traditional 'interests groups' such as Blacks, Worker's and Women. (to mention a few). That way they can do what the hell they want with 'our' party without looking for a mandate or consensus.

The DLC can complain all they want...but we're not going to put up with their collusion and corruption any longer. And the more Democrats who take the time to research the DLC...the sooner they will be gone. It's our mandate.

[Tinoire]

54. You're correct Q. No more discussions. We have a party to take back

Spinning wheels in DLC's mud just ain't worth it. With renewed zest, I'll keep an even closer watch on them because they're obviously very worried about all the dirt the grass-roots is digging up on them.

Back to exposing their dirt before we wake up one day and find our party destroyed past the point of any revival.

[greenohio]

58. So you only want to have discussion with those who agree with you?

Sounds rather timid...and not very fun. That said, I am not a "DLCer". I am actually much further left than the party on many issues. However, I realize that I cannot further progressive goals by "purging", "demonizing", calling "traitor" or "repuke-lite" everyone who disagrees with me. I know you do Q. And that is what has made posting on this and other threads with you fun. Thank you.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greenohio]

63. "tired of their losing strategies."

Thats right...we were big time winners before the DLC. And the dozens of ELECTED DLC members across the country are losers.

[InvisibleBallots]

71. it's so hard to argue

when my posts keep getting deleted! :shrug:

[leanin_green]

89. The infiltration is complete.

As I have said before. The RR declared war on the liberal elite as they see it. Any good war strategy includes plans to infiltrate the enemy in order to cause confusion and learn enemy strategies. These guys are very good at what they do, we should do likewise. This is a war for the soul of our nation. Start thinking like it.

[genius]

66. I found that out a while back. Loretta Sanchez is getting a lot of

money from Raytheon.

[TheEconomist]

68. Without money...

... there would be no politics in America. Money wins elections.

[mockingbich]

69. If the same corporate money supports both parties

then what are the corporations getting in return? Could it be that both parties are morphing into one big corporate sellout. What has either party done to win the approval of it's core constituency recently?

[Liberty Belle]

72. The corporations ARE their constiutency.

It's obvious. Just look at the laws getting rubberstamped: loosen pollution restrictions, encourage companies to outsource jobs overseas, and give enormous tax cuts to the corporations.

[Tinoire]

73. Kick for so more people can see who owns the DLC n/t

[madfloridian]

74. And how about those charter schools? They are the DLC baby.

I am a retired teacher. For the last two years, I taught at a very poor school with old books and sad conditions. Yet the charter and magnet schools were getting everything.

I treasured my time at that school, it was a new experience. I learned what was happening....that these were the children who were going to be screwed. In my classroom were children with all ranges of intelligence, but unfortunately most were from poor families.

A few of them had been accepted into the magnet and charter schools, but those schools don't have to keep you. The ones who returned to our school were good kids who just could not meet the intense standards and criteria. One slipped and got Cs, in a class with doctor's kids and professor's kids. He was sent back to our poor school.

This is a very long article about the DLC's plan for charter schools. Some of you who do not agree with the public school system may agree with their goals. I do not agree. I think the future of our country is based on a free, public, equal education for all. The children in my school did not have an equal education.

This is long, so I am only including one paragraph.
http://www.lib.utah.edu/epubs/hinckley/v2/lyman.htm

SNIP..."Those at the DLC take a “Third Way” approach to education reform. Their basic vehicle for improving the quality of education in America is the charter school. These schools are freed from most of the traditional rules that apply to public schools, but are in turn held accountable for results measured by performance reviews (Sylvester 1997, 82). Many are also established to address specific needs or talents, including student disabilities such as deafness or blindness or certain concentrations such as music or dance. What this model provides is a focus on results; it exists only as long as it serves its students well and attracts support from parents. But charter schools differ from private schools in that they are still held accountable to something besides market forces. In addition to supporting charter schools, the DLC has called for voluntary national academic standards, more teacher accountability, and an end to social promotion in which students are allowed to move onto the next grade simply because that is what the rest of their age group is doing. Also, the DLC believes that while reducing class size is important, teacher quality is what matters most to a student’s learning....."

You want a discussion. Discuss this.

[Tinoire]

76. Wonder why the DLC pushes charter schools? Bought by the RW CSE

But fear not! Both Jeb and W say this is a GREAT right-wing organization! http://www.freedomworks.org/know/index.php

Not bad for "bi-partisanship"!


On May 9, the U.S. House of Representatives Government Reform Committee held a hearing on alternative schools and educational reform in the District of Columbia. Legislators heard from various witnesses who testified on H.R. 684, the “D.C. School Choice Act of 2003” sponsored by Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.). Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) supports this sensible reform measure, which would increase significantly parents’ control over their children’s education.

Giving parents the choice among the widest possible array of schools will provide these learning institutions with the incentives to make available the best education for every student. Without school choice, schools get students and funding regardless of how well they perform. CSE supports policies that will increase competition, innovation, and diversity in the education system. This includes vouchers, charter schools, and tax credits.

http://www.theartoftheblog.com/the_art_of_the_blog/archives/2003_05.php
http://www.cse.org/informed/issues_template.php/1381.htm

Who are you as a teacher to doubt these intellectual right-wing giants?!


"Folks, you've got to get to know this organization ... They have been doing a great job all over the country educating people."

-President George W. Bush



"You guys are everywhere."

- Florida Governor Jeb Bush

Parents strive to send their children to safe schools where they will get the educational opportunities they need to compete in a global economy. Currently, there are a growing number of educational alternatives ranging from traditional public schools, private or parochial schools, charter schools, school vouchers, private scholarship programs, and home schooling.

Education bureaucracy and teachers' unions bar parents from full access to all these different educational opportunities. We can give you the tools you need to
http://www.cse.org/informed/school_choice.html


"Citizens for a Sound Economy, the conservative think tank and grassroots lobbying powerhouse ... has long shared Dick Armey's passion for tax cuts and deregulation."

- National Journal, Nov. 16 2002

Reforming education in the United States today involves a myriad of issues including school choice, charter schools, standards and assessment, as well as curriculum overhaul.

We believe that federal money and federal mandates will not necessarily bring these reforms. The goal to education reform should be to achieve quality and accountability in schooling.



-Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris


July 27, 2001
Capitol Comment 298: Expanding Children’s Education Opportunities
- by Jerry Ellig and Michele Mitola

March 4, 2001
CSE Principles of Education Reform
- by CSE's Center for Educational Opportunities

January 23, 2001
CSE Applauds Bush Education Initiative
- by Dan Cronin

October 3, 2000
Giving Parents a Voice: The Debate on School Choice
- by Anita Sheth Donaldson

March 15, 1999
CSE Backgound - Charter Schools
- by Anita Sheth Donaldson

http://www.cse.org/informed/education.html

[FightinNewDem]

80. Ask someone in a crappy school...

...if they think everything is hunky-dory, like the NEA drones would have us believe.

The DLC approach to education (public school choice, high standards, accountability) is more popular in impoverished communities than in the well-heeled suburbs. Piss-poor schools are a daily reality in inner cities, and residents are fed up.

While suburbanites with kids in private schools may cluck, and current and retired members of the education bureaucracy may squawk, these ideas are actually working, thanks to Democrats like Bart Peterson and Eva Moskowitz, people whose interest lies with the kids they represent, not the talking-points writers at the NEA.

[madfloridian]

83. Your attitude is showing. By whose standards are these working?

Public schools should be equal education for all. Not poor education for the poor and better schools for the privileged.

Please don't preach to me about schools. I know about schools. I taught for over 30 wonderful years, and I saw the destruction begin in the mid 90s maybe earlier.

I am tired of Democrats who want to control my medical care, and I am tired of Democrats who have never been the hell in a classroom preaching about accountability.

[FightinNewDem]

84. Well I am tired of something, too

I am tired of the substandard elementary school that my neighbor's kids have to attend. I am sick of a high school that seems utterly incapable of teaching even basic math and language skills. I am tired of educational bureaucrats who cry poverty while turning a blind eye to spending boondoggles like the underground garage at one of my local high schools.

And most of all, I am tired of people who mask their own self-interest and loyalty to a moribund bureaucracy that screws poor kids behind a facade of "caring" and "dedication". The system is broken. If you want to reflexively defend it, then you are part of the problem.

[madfloridian]

90. And, why is the system broken. Could they have allowed it to happen?

Could that be a result of the desire by both parties to turn the schools over to private companies. Yes, charter schools are partly run by private companies, at least the ones here are.

I could go on and on. But you would rather be mad at the messenger than provide an equal education for all.....

[Tinoire]

88. "No Child Left Behind". Ring a bell?

The children of the working class don't matter.

[madfloridian]

91. I taught the really poor, but they were smart, loving, and eager.

I taught the advantaged until the last couple of years. I had what I needed as a rule.

But at the school where I last taught, I saw the real poverty of our country. I saw that no one cared. I saw that my classroom had textbooks 15 to 20 years old while the other schools had it all.

I loved my kids, and I hurt for them that no one cared. I hate these guys with their arrogant attitudes toward those who are less well off.

My husband and I are lucky and comfortable, but few are anymore. I despise arrogance in all its forms. And I see a hell of a lot of it here.

[greenohio]

82. Don't forget how DFA funds the DLCers.

Its a conspiracy.

[FubarFly]

87. Lol

What brilliant satire.

Your point about judging people as individuals based on their own merits, and not using a broad brush to characterize an entire group because of a few preconceived- albeit well-deserved- biases is spot on. I'm glad you're praising the DFA for supporting some of the few remaining non-corrupt DLC members out there.

It's a conspiracy. Indeed! It's a conspiracy to keep Democrats from representing the interests of working-class people by keeping them divided and squabbling, thus excusing corruption and consolidating corporate control. You certainly are doing your part to help.

Good for you. :hi: