The spin of yesterday’s election that is all over the MSM today is, “It’s the year of the woman”.

Some would beg to differ. On the surface it is true, several winners of primaries yesterday were women. But the case could be made that half of the four most prominent women who won, were incredibly wealthy people who bought their elections. Billionaire Meg Whitman spent $81 million dollars of her own money to buy her win (ending up equaling $80/vote) and boasted that she would spend $150 million to win (buy) the Governorship.

Millionaire Carly Fiorina bought her primary at a comparable bargain, only spending about $7 million.

Down in Arkansas, corporate-owned Blanche Lincoln won. She was heavily funded by oil corps, Wall Street corps and health insurance corps, she boasted about blocking Obama on the Stimulus and HCR, she had Pres Obama and Clinton campaigning for her and meanwhile attacked Unions as outsiders and the enemy.

Isn’t the real common denominator here money, not sex? Or maybe sex in that there is no difference that gender makes when you can spend $80 million dollars to win an election? One could argue that there is no glass ceiling over the wealthy, whatever their sex. Their money is just as green and buys the same attack ads.

So why does the MSM focus on the sex of candidates instead of what really got them elected? Because it’s an effective way for the wealthy and corporations to pleasantly mask the real story of how our democracy is just an auction that goes to the highest bidder?

What is very instructive is what happened in California with ballot propositions. Two propositions, put up by corporations to benefit themselves at the expense of the public, nearly passed. Meanwhile, a proposition that would have allowed public funding to reduce the power of corporations over our elected officials and elections, was decisively defeated (big cheers and props to Choicelady for all her efforts on trying to get this passed!).

People seem so conditioned by commercial advertising, they can be convinced to vote for candidates and laws that clearly would hurt them.

This would instead seem to be The Year of The Billionaires. With the SCOTUS ruling permitting corps to spend unlimited sums on supporting candidates who will work for them and opposing those who are foolish enough to want to represent the citizens, billionaires have far more power and influence over our elections than ever before.

So, instead of being pacified with the pleasant, uplifting spin that what happened yesterday was a great win for sexual equality, if we consider the inequity between 99.5% Americans and corporations, the dominating influence and control they have over our elections and democracy, yesterday’s election should instead be a warning and a wake up call that our democracy is continuing to be bought right out from under the feet of men and women equally.

51
Leave a Comment

Please Login to comment
9 Comment threads
42 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
17 Comment authors
PepeLepewMightywoofchoiceladyKhiraddildenusa Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
SueInCa
Member

Ok AdLib, I am missing something here, trolls? Or do you mean the ones who were gloating over republican wins in a republican primary?

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

Hey Meg Whitman, California is not for sale.

Report this comment

dildenusa
Member

What do you mean California isn’t for sale? Now that the politicians have completely screwed up paradise, I want to bid one dollar.

Report this comment

SueInCa
Member

In your case, we accept but you have to get rid of all the lazy politicians in the state. Especially McClinotck and Darryl Issa

Report this comment

PatsyT
Member

This calls for a new Demon Sheep Ad
Gee how can we top this one???
httpsh://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo7HiQRM7BA

Report this comment

Khirad
Member

Patsy! How could you forget this one?

Report this comment

kesmarn
Admin

Wow. If there were an award for the ad that most seamlessly combined utter mean-spiritedness with surreal ridiculousness, this one would win it hands down.

Report this comment

PatsyT
Member

Ha, that one is totally ridiculous !
How about all the stuff today about Carly Fiorina with her comments about
Barbara Boxers hair.
I Love Boxer!
I hope she kicks their butt!!

Report this comment

Khirad
Member

Plus, I never realized how hot she was before this video. Although, you see her now, and you can tell she was, it’s a bit creepy to hear Chris Matthews talking about it though. Of course, he can make many things creepy. “Hah!”

Report this comment

Khirad
Member

That’s also why I mentioned that. It was very flattering, and the rest is as you say. It’s like she has subversives sabotaging her internet ad campaign.

Report this comment

escribacat
Member

Is this a spoof? 🙂

Report this comment

PatsyT
Member

I think they did make a spoof of that ad.
I am not sure which one is which
They are both so hilarious and ridiculous !

Report this comment

whatsthatsound
Member

With a title like that, I expected this article to have something to do with the world’s oldest profession. Instead, it’s about politics.

……………..
( I think I’ll just let everyone fill in their own punchline)

Report this comment

choicelady
Member

WTS – I hate it when I don’t get a joke. Makes me feel like an old fuddy duddy. But I won’t ask you to explain. Sigh.

Report this comment

PatsyT
Member

Choice,
Let me see if I can read the WTS mind…..
Is he saying that the world oldest profession and Politicians
are the same thing?

Report this comment

whatsthatsound
Member
boomer1949
Member

Makes no difference…a lifted skirt is a lifted skirt. Oh, and don’t forget the zippers.

Report this comment

whatsthatsound
Member
kesmarn
Admin

It’s so frustrating to hear the message that women like Palin and Angle somehow represent women in general, and that their dubious “accomplishments” should be a source of satisfaction for us.

I identify with these women about as much as the typical African American voter identifies with Michael Steele or Clarence Thomas.

These women don’t speak for me or my friends; nor do I see them as role models for anyone. I would rather have an all male government, with people like Barack Obama and Joe Biden in charge, than see women like them in positions of power.

At the risk of using a strong word, I must say: These women are
collaborators. They collaborate with and enable not only their own oppressors, but people and institutions who do bad things to everyone in the country — male and female alike.

They are anything but feminists. And they hypocritically want to deny other women the same lives they crave for themselves. They have zero desire to be confined to their homes and domestic duties, dressed “modestly” and erasing their own personalities in unceasing and unrewarded (or even recognized) service to others. Yet they choose this for others.

These are not nice people. Ladies (and gents), these are not our sisters.

Report this comment

javaz
Member

The amount of money politicians spend on elections is disgusting and immoral.
These multi-millionaire or billionaires certainly do not reflect ‘We The People’.

Here’s a good article on Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman and their not so stellar performance as CEOs.

http://blogs.computerworld.com/16294/carly_fiorina_meg_whitman_could_gop_do_worse_tcot?source=rss_blogs

Sharron Angle sure sounds like a crazed Tea Partier – being against alcohol and wanting to bring back prohibition especially in Nevada, and in Las Vegas in particular doesn’t seem like a winning platform, but she did win the primary.

And then what in the heck is going on in South Carolina?

Alvin Greene is unemployed, lives with his parents, never campaigned, and was arrested last November and charged with a felony?
Yet he came up with $10,400.00 to get his name on the ballot and he won the Democratic primary!

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/06/south-carolina-dems-call-on-greene-to-drop-out-of-senate-race.php?ref=fpb

DeMint is giddy and will coast easily to a landslide victory.

Report this comment

bito
Member

j’avaz, Hello girl! Did you catch the emergency ruling today on them blocking “clean elections” in AZ?

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/06/09/20100609cleanruling0609.html

Open up the money gates! Yahoo, eeewhaaaa! Git along “little donors.”

Report this comment

Pepe Lepew
Member
Khirad
Member

Beat me to it Bito. I was going to ever so gently mention that Arizona of all places has Clean Elections.

Is the Constitutional “issue” the same as with Citizens United?

Report this comment

nellie
Member

Hey! I checked in this morning just to see the headlines and saw a big hug from javaz. Damn it’s good to see your screen name again.

Report this comment

javaz
Member

((((((((((HUGS)))))))))) B’ito!

Welcome back!

Report this comment

escribacat
Member

Hey Bito. Good to see you!

Report this comment

Kalima
Admin

It’s nice to see a woman win, but if she was elected through the same corrupt cycle as a man might sometimes use, what is the difference. The most important questions are, can she do the job she has been elected to do and will she do it, is she sincere and does she care about the people who voted for her and the welfare of the American people, if not, there seems no point to rejoice or celebrate the achievement,

Report this comment

escribacat
Member

I voted for Hillary during the primary — and I was up front to friends and family that I was doing so because I wanted to see a woman president. I was annoyed when Obama won the nomination. As it turns out, I’m definitely not a PUMA and probably one of Obama’s most loyal cheerleaders now. The females that seem to be crawling out of the rightwing woodwork these days really give me the willies. I would like to see a woman president before I die, but not at any price!

Report this comment

Blues Tiger
Member
Blues Tiger
Pepe Lepew
Member

I’m guessing 1968?

Report this comment