"I Cannot Be Bought or Bossed"

There’s something relieving about hearing a candidate speak those words. It’s a super relief if those words are sincere and genuine. When one looks at candidates who have raised money, one expects that candidate to have not raised money that would make it seem he or she has been “bought” or “bossed” already. However, not being “bought” or “bossed” has its consequences. By not agreeing to accept contributions from corporate powers and by trying to shift the way campaigns are run in America, a candidate not only must deal with getting the American people on his or her side during the election but also must deal with trying to keep the corporate powers that be from interfering with his or her desire to get the message of his or her campaign to the American people.

Thankfully, the American people follow the money that comes into candidates’ hands more than ever these days. When Hillary Clinton was found out to have connections with a Mr. Hsu, the leaked story drove her to give money back. As News Corp or Rupert Murdoch has lined up to support Hillary Clinton, many Democratic voters especially those aligned with MoveOn.org have wondered what the reasons may be and what effects this support will have. John Edwards even made headlines when he gave back money to businesses he found out to be allowing predatory lending. It’s reasonable to presume that all Americans will have reactions as more money pours in to the hands of either of the Democrats. However, the American people do not always act on their suspicions in regards to campaign funding and will probably vote for whomever regardless of where the money comes from as long as whomever's message is catching their attention.

Public financing is another area of funding that Democratic candidates wish to explore but just can’t bring themselves to do such a thing and has become something Americans are interested in. Barack Obama would like to know “whether he can take money from donors who want him to be president, then give it back later.” According to his campaign spokesman Bill Burton, “Senator Obama has long been a proponent of public financing of campaigns and we are asking the FEC to take a step that could preserve the public financing option for the party's nominees.” But this is clearly not how public financing aimed at curbing corruption and promoting greater faith in the political process is supposed to work. In effect, Barack Obama is saying if the American people fail me, I want to be able to turn to the corporate powers that support me and use their money instead of the pithy contributions the public has given me.

While I am in no position to judge the what effects campaign contributions will have on progressive reform yet, as I have no information to draw many of the inferences and conclusions I would like to, there is one fact in this race that can be concluded from the numbers. Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are the only “clean” candidates running. And by “clean”, I mean, these candidates could do anything for the American people because they have not been “bought or bossed”. The numbers from OpenSecrets.org are as follows. Read them carefully. And think about what impact these numbers will have when considering the fact that the media has Americans choosing Obama or Hillary right now.

Casinos/Gambling

Commercial Banks

Computers/Internet

Education

Health Professionals

Hedge Funds

Insurance

Lawyers/Law Firms

Lobbyists

Oil & Gas

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products

Real Estate

Retired

Securities & Investment

Telephone Utilities

Tobacco

TV/Movies/Music

Now, look at the areas where Kucinich or Gravel does not appear. They include Casinos/Gambling, Commercial Banks, Hedge Funds, Lobbyists, Telephone Utilities, and Tobacco. Gravel actually one ups Kucinich here and has no contributions from Insurance, Oil & Gas, or Pharmaceuticals/Health Products.

Also, in my opinion, it takes a special kind of person to take money from the Tobacco Industries these days.

All of these numbers should have you asking, where did this come from? What companies are supporting this candidate? And for what? What will these candidates put in their policies to “give back” or “show their appreciation” for having been given support in the 2008 Election? What issues in America will these contributions affect? What reforms will this money stop?

The “For what?” question was not asked enough when Bush ran. It was not asked really at all except by third, fourth, and fifth parties when Gore or Kerry ran. By 2004, Bush had sharpened the political minds of Americans as a result of his misleading, corruption, and unconstitutional procedures. It took untold damages to wake people up when it should not have. And now, the “For what?” question is even more important as people succumb to that “anybody but a Republican” mentality.

Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel have something that all the other candidates do not have. Either of them will go out and talk about whatever whenever. And they will go on all our favorite talk/news shows and rally Americans to change the system. Kucinich and Gravel will speak the cold, hard truths like no other candidate in this race will. Standing up to a system stacked against them shows just how much courage and heart these individuals have. Each both approach being in a league with the likes of Ralph Nader, the god of all consumer advocates and fighter of rigged electoral systems/processes. And each are serious about winning if and only if the people would stop ignoring the corporate powered candidates who mean more of the same for Americans.

The information is there. Do with it what you will. If you find it in your heart and mind to act on the information showing that Kucinich and Gravel are the only grassroots campaigns in this election, than talk to me. We can discuss how to boost Kucinich’s popularity and get him to pick up on some fantastic policies and ideas Gravel has.