Yevette wasn't entirely clear on the purpose of a PAC (Political Action Committee) and briefly it's one of the biggest tax scams of the Twentieth Century. Not to be outdone, Congress followed that with the SuperPAC just in case the PAC couldn't handle enough graft.
Ostensibly a PAC is to represent a collective of people that might not otherwise be represented. They gain some strength through numbers, as they say. The flaw is that aspect is trivial as the Big Spenders represent themselves as well. Where Suzy Cupcake is saving quarters on her lemonade stand to save the penguins, BP is spending billions to give itself the right to drown them in crude oil. As you've seen from the votes, you know who wins.
The purpose of the funds is ostensibly to pay for campaign costs but this term is so nebulous it could be anything from Las Vegas hookers to a naked statue of Michael Dukakis riding a tank. The term doesn't mean anything and, thus, they abuse the living hell out of it. They can spend like they're rockers but these fops in cheap suits never even learned a chord.
One example is Sarah Palin who accomplishes no useful purpose unless you consider it worthwhile to utter misplaced proclamations every so often as if she feels she is a misplaced Oracle. She sounds like she should have had a few more (or a few less) Lone Star beers ... but ... this is worth millions through her PAC.
With the Pentagon they at least build something once in a while, they don't steal all of it. With PACs, they get the lot.
The PAC dollars come into the creepy people with the pencil-thin mustaches and they find the worst whores of Congress (e.g. Orrin Hatch, etc). Slide him a few dollars, all perfectly legal, Hatch votes his 'conscience' and you go back to tell your PAC partners that everything is groovy in Washington.
Tip: wash your hands.
The immense crookedness around PACs would take volumes to describe. Both parties use them and there is nothing about them that doesn't smell like rotting fish.
Ostensibly a PAC is to represent a collective of people that might not otherwise be represented. They gain some strength through numbers, as they say. The flaw is that aspect is trivial as the Big Spenders represent themselves as well. Where Suzy Cupcake is saving quarters on her lemonade stand to save the penguins, BP is spending billions to give itself the right to drown them in crude oil. As you've seen from the votes, you know who wins.
The purpose of the funds is ostensibly to pay for campaign costs but this term is so nebulous it could be anything from Las Vegas hookers to a naked statue of Michael Dukakis riding a tank. The term doesn't mean anything and, thus, they abuse the living hell out of it. They can spend like they're rockers but these fops in cheap suits never even learned a chord.
One example is Sarah Palin who accomplishes no useful purpose unless you consider it worthwhile to utter misplaced proclamations every so often as if she feels she is a misplaced Oracle. She sounds like she should have had a few more (or a few less) Lone Star beers ... but ... this is worth millions through her PAC.
With the Pentagon they at least build something once in a while, they don't steal all of it. With PACs, they get the lot.
The PAC dollars come into the creepy people with the pencil-thin mustaches and they find the worst whores of Congress (e.g. Orrin Hatch, etc). Slide him a few dollars, all perfectly legal, Hatch votes his 'conscience' and you go back to tell your PAC partners that everything is groovy in Washington.
Tip: wash your hands.
The immense crookedness around PACs would take volumes to describe. Both parties use them and there is nothing about them that doesn't smell like rotting fish.
No comments:
Post a Comment