It appears now that all the legitimate complaints that the pursuit of campaign contributions had utterly distorted U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is becoming a small part of a much larger catastrophe.
That is because as critical as the Middle East is, the whole issue is now being subsumed by a much larger threat: the threat, perhaps likelihood, that thanks to the Citizens United decision, the presidency and Congress will be permanently owned by the Republican right.
There is little need to explain here what the Citizens United decision did except to say that it eliminated virtually all bans on spending by special interests to elect candidates who will enact their agenda. As the New Yorker's expert on legal issues, Jeffrey Toobin put it in a piece analyzing the decision last month, "The Roberts Court, it appears, will guarantee moneyed interests the freedom to raise and spend any amount, from any source, at any time, in order to win elections."
That is why there is virtually no possibility that President Obama or the Congressional Democrats will be able to come close to matching the resources raised by their Republican opponents this year or, unless Citizens United is overturned, any year.
Defenders of the decision respond that labor unions are also freed by Citizens United from any constraints on giving. And that is true. But anyone who believes that unions (whose funding source consists not of billionaires or millionaires but of the membership dues of working people) can keep up with the corporate interests must be living on another planet.
Adding insult to injury, Republicans (like Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, for instance) have been successfully gutting unions for years so that their membership, and accompanying dues, is at an all-time low. Expecting the auto workers to compete with the likes of the multi-billionaire Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson is a joke.
American politics (and that means policy) is now owned by the super-rich. That has always been true to an extent but the reign of money has been intermittently interrupted by progressive government too.
As the historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. pointed out in The Cycles of American History, since the start of the republic progressive government has alternated with conservative retrenchment in predictable cycles. The reactionary politics of the Gilded Age was followed by the Progressive Era which was followed by the ultra-conservative Roaring Twenties which was followed by the New and Fair Deal, etc.
With Citizens United allowing the corporate interests to continually spend as much as they want to essentially buy elections, we may soon be in the last cycle: permanent right-wing rule.
Another difference between what is coming as compared to what Schlesinger wrote about is that the conservatives of his day were nothing like the extreme right-wingers of today. Today's Republicans in no way resemble the Eisenhower Republicans who Schlesinger viewed as the conservative course correction following FDR and Truman. Today's Republicans are far right revolutionaries who are not trying to correct the legacy of 20th century progressive government but to eradicate it. And, thanks to Citizens United, to permanently hold on to power so that no corrective will ever apply to them.
How does this affect Israel and the issues surrounding it? That is hard to say. The ultra-rich right tends not to care much about anything that does not put money in its own pocket. With the exception of the those right-wing billionaires who are part of the military industrial complex (think Halliburton and the like) most tend to be obsessed with the domestic side. They don't want to pay taxes and they want to get rid of laws that protect the air, water, the people who work for them and other Americans impacted by their factories and plants.
AIPAC will still exist in the post-Citizens United world although it will lose ground to the likes of Sheldon Adelson who poured millions into Newt Gingrich's campaign and has now pledged to do the same for Mitt Romney. (Adelson, by the way, broke with AIPAC because he considers them not hard-line enough).
However, AIPAC's job will obviously be easier with progressive influence lessened unless the right-wingers permanently ensconced in positions of power decide that supporting Israel negatively affects them financially. Since that is all these people care about, the old arguments about right and wrong as they relate to Israel/Palestine will be irrelevant. The only bottom line will be the bottom line.
See what I mean?
Unless President Obama convinces Americans that their democracy is being stolen now, in the 2012 election, and prevails by doing so, the Middle East issue simply disappears into the larger catastrophe: the end of the American democratic experiment after 225 years.
Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjayrosenberg
Jared Bernstein: A Debate on Inequality, Opportunity, and Politics
Bruce Ackerman and Ian Ayres: How Congress Can Overrule Citizens United
Peter Scheer: How Citizens United Can Be Used to Curtail Super PAC Spending
His" foreign policy assistant Igor Khrestin. Khrestin was a researcher at the American Enterprise Institue (AEI) and has written about Israel and Iran for Daniel Pipes's Middle East Quarterly..."
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/06/a-look-at-who-is-running-mark-kirks-office-in-his-absence.html
That's how 'progressive influence" is defined in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Twelve_Apostles_(Community_of_Christ)
"Progressive Influence
The Council of Twelve Apostles has long been regarded as the primary advocates for the growing international presence of the church and its international witness of Jesus Christ. In addition, the Council has frequently strived to lead the church towards progressive stances on issues such as homosexuality, women in the priesthood, open communion, ecumenism, interfaith dialogue, environmentalism, peace and justice ministries. Former Apostle Charles D. Neff (1958-1984), led the Council of Twelve in developing relativistic viewpoints towards both ritual and doctrine in order to make the gospel relevant across cultures. Presently, the Council contains three female apostles and one native African."
Wake up --USA Today AVE govt worker pay$116k per year
while AVE private sector worker makes $63k---
The thing in the USA is that the open society gets things balanced out---the $116k salaries will bankrupt the local state and federal governments pretty soon.
But WHY, in an Election that is about your future, your Economy and so on, why is ISRAEL on the Agenda on such Elections ?
Shouldn't Religion (all kinds of) be out of Politics ?
Brilliant. Thank you Macready
An even handed approach to the mid east will be positive for the Us and is the only way peace can be fostered in the mid east. ... and Israels future depends on that.
I am not sure about Israel, but here in US, it is the duty of a citizen to put his government and its policies under a microscope and criticize with full impunity, if he wishes. That is why we are Americans.
You are still living in Bush era, I see.
But here, we were too busy with our vacations, post-New Year parties or Kim Kardashian's relationship, to take to the streets and voice our protest. Poll after poll shows that a strong majority are against this law and for a constitutional amendment for reversal. You think the elected officials would be paying attention.
But I don't blame them. I blame US, the citizens, myself included, for remaining on the sidelines.
This is one of those subjects that will eventually lead to an OWS-type movement to force a reversal, albeit violent and forceful. That is the only way to get the attention of the electorate.
http://campaignmoney.org/files/DemCorpPCAFmemoFINAL.pdf
Hilarious. Obviously, you're European if you think Americans are "Too busy with our vacations"
http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/01/31/paid-holidaysvacation-days-in-the-u-s-versus-other-oecd-countries/
That is a disingenuous argument put forth by the Neocons and perpetuated by Fox News. But you are welcome to stick with that.
The millions of the Unions can be, and are, easily surpassed by the billions of the Koch Brothers and S. Adelson.
"Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit...is a revolutionary act." George Orwell
The Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court....officially "legalized" bribery and coersion.
This is the sad and true facts!! America is under attack and this time it's Israel on the attack!
From 1989 through 2012, AIPAC does not even rank in the top 200 special interest groups in terms of political contributions.
Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2012
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A
This is the total for 2012 so far;
Total Lobbying Expenditures: $710,849
Subtotal for Parent American Israel Public Affairs Cmte: $710,849
American Israel Public Affairs Cmte Lobbying by Industry Industry Total
Pro-Israel total $710,849
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000046963&year=2012
Amazing--I would have thought from certain blog posts as well as some of the usual comments that AIPAC would have been number one.
But none of this accounts for the Citizens United-shadow organizations/individuals contributing on behalf of AIPAC, which by law, we will not know the amount. Sheldon Adelson's recent "break up" with AIPAC was very convenient, don't you think?
You seem to want us think that AIPAC is the only Pro-Israeli lobbying group, not even mentioning the individuals with deep pockets.
I was just pointing out MJ's hysteria over AIPAC and how a certain crew on HP thinks that they bought the entire US government.
AIPAC's real power is in having the better argument. Ultimately, it's free democracy V. Arab brutality and intolerance, and here in the US, free democracies will always win that argument.
Maybe you can interest the National Association of Realtors into taking up your cause? They spend 10x as much, and real estate is their business.
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000000062&year=2012
"How does this affect Israel and the issues surrounding it? That is hard to say."
And then he reverted to form. Oh well.
- - - - -
That is my greatest fear. That and the fact that many, many voters do not pay attention to detail when listening to or reading about election information. The "common" man (middle class) will have no privileges when the rich and powerful take over this country. Wages will be at the absolute minimum to keep employees working. Only the CEOs and shareholders will make a comfortable living. It's a sad commentary, but the U.S.A. as we know it will be a thing of the past.
And it only took 3 clicks on my keyboard for a total of 17 seconds.
"What do you call someone who won't change his mind and won't
change the subject?"
MJ Rosenberg?
THESE are the attacks on our democracy!!!!