A true testament of whether a person running for office is really about what he or she says or is just blowing smoke to get elected comes when dollar bills get waved underneath their noses. At that moment, most candidates crumble--and I don't mean they do something against the law.

It is that they twist themselves into the most amazing rhetorical binds, making the most laughable justifications for taking money from questionable sources--"questionable" meaning do they not think that those people donating want something in return? Whether that's people on Wall Street, corporate raiders/bankers/oligarchs donating to private foundations or similar sludge?

Not Bernie. Bernie is campaigning resolutely against the billionaires and the corruption of money in politics. He could have said, "you know what, I'll set up a SuperPAC because I'm a good guy, I'm ethical and when I get into office I'll change the system"--and everyone in the political system would have given him a pass, and said, "right, you can't unilaterally disarm".

Not Bernie:

Donna Mae Litowitz, a Miami Beach retiree, likes Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont so much that three months ago she sent his presidential campaign $10,000. His campaign sent back all but $2,700 because it was more than he was allowed to take under federal election law, but she wishes he had kept it all. “I like what Sanders stands for, and he says what needs to be said,” said Ms. Litowitz, who gave money in 2008 to Senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. “And I don’t like Hillary Clinton.” In an election dominated by million-dollar donations to “super PACs,” Ms. Litowitz qualifies in Mr. Sanders’s insurgent campaign as a big donor. Unlike almost all of the other major Democratic and Republican candidates this year, Mr. Sanders has refused to accept support from super PACs, relying instead on supporters like Ms. Litowitz as well as tens of thousands of small donors giving as little as $5 or $10. The average donation, according to campaign officials, is $31.30.[emphasis added]

While direct comparisons are difficult at this early stage in the 2016 race, Mr. Sanders’s small-dollar support appears significantly higher than Mr. Obama’s in 2008, and more than any other candidate this cycle.



Mr. Sanders has raised more money in gifts of $200 or less than any candidate, Democrat or Republican, an analysis of campaign finance reports shows. A huge chunk of his money — $11.4 million, or about 75 percent of all his contributions — has come from small donations routed through ActBlue, an online site that facilitates contributions to Democrats, records show. The influx of support has helped Mr. Sanders build a formidable war chest, with his campaign raising $15.2 million as of the most recent filings with the Federal Election Commission in July. Campaign officials say he has raised millions more since then and will far surpass that total this quarter. That still puts him far behind Mrs. Clinton’s fund-raising juggernaut, but Mr. Sanders said in an interview that he was unbowed. “We will be greatly outspent, yes, but we will raise enough money to wage a winning campaign,” he said. Democratic strategists are beginning to take notice. “His money is very impressive,” said Bill Burton, a former aide to Mr. Obama who helped found Priorities USA, a super PAC that is now supporting Mrs. Clinton’s bid for the Democratic nomination and has received donations of at least $1 million each from a number of big Democratic donors like Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, George Soros and Haim Saban.[emphasis added]

And:The point is: the people believe the system is entirely corrupt and that only people with money matter and, as important, no matter what a politician says in a campaign, once she or he is elected, it doesn't matter--the big donors are all that matter.

Bernie is basically saying no, that isn't me.

And, then, there's Larry Lessig.

I've known Larry for about 15 years. I knew him much better and was in regular conversation when we had two different cases on copyright issues headed for the Supreme Court. His case, Eldred v Ashcroft, challenged the constitutionality of the copyright extension act. As a person who believes in authors' rights, I supported Lessig's view for many reasons (I don't want to digress on this topic too much--but briefly, I think (a) the public's right to information and knowledge deserves equal weight over copyright protections and (b) most copyright laws benefit big corporations, not individual authors, and this is an issue where authors have to organize unions and exercise collective bargaining power). People criticized Larry for taking this particular case on. But, I respected his moxie and passion.

Then, Larry, who could have rode his prominence in the copyright world for the rest of his career and sat safely in academia and be paid quite well, gave it all up to dive into the question of the corruption of politics by big money; he did that partly because of how he saw all copyright legislation being warped by big money. Again, I respected that decision as well.

He, then, raised $10 million in the 2014 cycle for his so-called MayDay PAC, with an aim to use big money to elect people who would end the system. It failed, some argued, if one looks at the results. Again, I don't want to spend too much time on this effort--personally, I shrugged and wondered, at the time, whether it would be effective but I don't begrudge people who want to take chances and try to be against-the-grain innovative.

But, Larry has now gone too far, in my opinion. When I learned recently that he was considering running for president because he wasn't pleased enough by Bernie Sanders' view on ending the corruption of money in politics--as if making the repeal of Citizens United and forgoing any use of SuperPACs wasn't enough, among other things Bernie advocates--I wrote to him privately and on his website.

Basically, I said, no, Larry, this is absurd. Every dollar you raise and every minute you occupy attention is a dollar and moment you take away from Bernie's efforts--and if you can't see that this is likely the one option in the near future to clean up the corrupt system (and, as I've said in every instance, Bernie faces a steep hill even without such distractions), then, no, you've gone too far.

I said this mostly privately and in a low key way. But, enough is enough:

“Donald Trump is the biggest gift to the movement for reform since the Supreme Court gave us Citizens United,” said Lessig in a recent interview, referring to the court decision that riled up liberals by granting essentially unlimited campaign contributions from corporate entities. “What he’s saying is absolutely correct, the absolute truth. He has pulled back the curtain.”

So enamored are some reformers with Trump’s truth-telling invective that Lessig, who announced this month that he is considering a run for president to highlight the issue, told POLITICO Magazine he would not rule out a third party run with Trump should the opportunity arise. (A spokesperson for Trump could not be reached for comment.) “I’ll make a promise,” Lessig later added. “If Trump said he was going to do one thing and fix this corrupted system, then go back to his life as an entertainment figure, I absolutely would link up with Donald Trump.”[emphasis added]

And:This is blindness of the worst kind (and, knowing Larry, he'll think, "no, you don't see the truth"). Donald Trump is a liar, a psychopathic, abusive, dangerous man. He is stirring up the most hateful elements in our society, targeting millions of people, he has an entirely hateful view of women and their roles. Essentially, Trump is only respectful of one kind of person: the kind that bows down to Trump and accepts his rule.

To be sure, money in politics is corruption.

But, corrupting the soul, corrupting and poisoning the entire social fabric is the end result of Trump's "message". What kind of country will be left, purified of billionaire money and influence-peddling (if, you, Larry, get your dream candidate elected and he, in fact, banishes money from Washington...good luck with seeing that promise through) if millions of people are under attack and, as an aside, in the world, we are treated as a laughingstock (as if that isn't already the case) when we elect a guy who will treat the Lincoln Bedroom like the Playboy mansion--not to mention someone who would on any given Monday be insulted by some world leader and, for the heck of it, on Tuesday send in the Marines to teach a lesson?

Larry, you've gone over the deep end. Pull yourself back before it's too late.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = ==

BUY The Essential Bernie Sanders and His Vision for America



BTW, I can't help but laugh at the irony that above this diary is flashing an ad for Lessig's campaign...