Big Money Did Not Lose the 2012 Election
The New York Times editorial yesterday is titled, "A Landslide Loss for Big Money." It declears that, "The millionaires and billionaires who gave nearly $500 million to independent groups in the race to elect Mitt Romney and other Republicans not only bet on the wrong party, they bet on the wrong tactic." This is pure BS.
Big Money actually gave heavily to both Romney and Obama, but more to Obama! Here are the numbers. Obama received $423,360,831 in large individual contributions versus Romney who received only $316,212,124 in large individual contributions. Obama also received more than Romney in small individual contributions: $214,314,215 versus $70,851,796. True, Romney's campaign funding came 80.8% from large individual donations versus only 66.3% for Obama's campaign, but this is not because Obama received less money than Romney from large individual donors but rather because he received so much more than Romney from small contributions that it reduced his percentage from large donors.
Obama did not accept money from PACs while Romney did. But the total amount that Romney got from PACs was only $994,782 (which was only 0.3% of his total) and amounts to a pittance compared to the $423,360,831 that Obama got from large individual contributions.
Big Money funds both major electoral parties because the election system, itself, is how Big Money keeps control of the United States, as discussed more here.
The Obama administration has been nothing if not a loyal and obedient friend to Big Money. Everything that Big Money wants it gets from Obama: Instead of single payer health care, people are forced to pay stiff premiums to for-profit insurance companies for health insurance that is very inadequate for many. Instead of taxing the billionaires the government borrows from them and repays them with interest using our tax dollars and savage "austerity" budget cuts to make these payments. Instead of telling the banksters who created the financial crash to take the losses and placing the banks under receivership to protect their innocent depositors as the law specifies, Obama declared the banksters "too big to fail" and used trillions of taxpayer dollars to bail them out.
Instead of ending the war in Afghanistan based on a notorious lie about 9/11 and weapons of mass destruction, Obama continues waging that war and has expanded it with drones to Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and no doubt other countries as well. Instead of condemning Israel's ethnic cleansing of non-Jews to make Israel a Jewish State as opposed to a state of all its residents, Obama fully supports this ethnic cleansing project and joins the Big Money-controlled mass media in portraying Palestinian resistance to it as "terrorism," thus perpetuating the Big Lie that the Orwellian war of social control--the "War on Terror"--is a war to defend Americans, when in fact it is a war to keep us obedient to Big Money.
Instead of declaring the obscene economic inequality of the United States to be morally wrong and siding with the millions of Americans who want equality, Obama guarantees the perpetuation of this inequality by offering only to tinker with the tax system in ways that will ensure that the billionaire class retains their billions. Instead of telling the Justice Department and its FBI to protect the Occupy Wall Street people from violence directed against them, Obama gave all of the police departments a green light to attack the Occupy folks and drive them off their camp sites.
Really, what more could Big Money ask of Obama?
This article may be copied and posted on other websites. Please include all hyperlinks.