A billion can do a lot in DC guest blogger Jeffrey

Jeffrey Varasano: "I posted this earlier on a thread talking about people like Romney or George Will. There sure seemed to be people who claimed to be Republicans but undermine us from the inside. Why? Are they bought off? Maybe they were progressive loyalists from the beginning who were long ago tasked with infiltrating the Republicans or conservative media? Or what about blackmail? Maybe Soros digs up dirt on people and then uses them as puppets thereafter.

These things sound far-fetched until you sketch out what it would take. I've done this before with Christopher Buckley. Let's say that you wanted to buy control of the US government. How many people would you have to buy and how much would each cost? Let's do a back-of-the-envelope budget using $1B / year.

Just to use round numbers let's say you devoted $1M per year towards each House and Senate seat. That money could be split out. A no-show job for a congressman's kid for $300k, $50K each to 4 staffers, $100k to a private eye or honey pot operation. Dump the rest into campaign contributions. If it's a congressman you don't think you can control then keep the honey pot budget and give the rest into an opponent. So now for $535 million you've got your finger into every congressional & senate seat pretty good. Keep in mind that if a target is in a safe district and you've already got pictures of him with a naked 8 year old, your budget to keep him in control can go way down next year and you can put the surplus towards a different seat.

Now you make a list of other people you want to influence. Let's say you make a list of media people. On the conservative influencer list you start with Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity at the top and then work your way down. Most people would be surprised how quickly you run out of recognizable names, especially in the pre-internet era. Pre-internet maybe 50 names. Today maybe it's a 100. Remember you don't have to control each and every one and the money can be spent either supporting them, ruining them, or even recruiting new ones.

Add another for a 100 liberal media people. So that's another 200 million bringing us to $735M.

Next up we take the remaining $265M and divide it into 2650, $100k buckets which we spread out through the bureaucracies AKA deep state. For sure a good hunk of that goes to the Fed and money supply people.

So for a billion dollars a year we've got our finger in just about everything.

From here out we can expand our influence without spending any more money but rather using money that falls out of the influence we've already bought.

Let's say you want to start "grassroots" efforts at all 3000 colleges, again spending $1M each. That's $3B, but you don't have to come out of pocket for that. All you have to do is bump some college subsidy budget from 147 billion to 150 billion, and then divert 3 billion. Then with each college you split the million with a 100k going to the Latino center, 100k to the environmental sustainability center, 100K to the women's center, etc.

So all you need to get started is a billion a year. But that's really chump change in an era when quantitative easing was pumping out 80 billion dollars a month. Who's to say if that defense contract is worth 43 billion or 65 billion? Certainly not the congressmen and media you own.

Keep in mind that big money players are simultaneously playing this game. The Chinese, the Russians, The Saudis, the UN, the Bilderbergs, Soros, etc. And all the bought off players agree on one thing: if you notice or talk too much about any of this you are a kook.

Cash for influence

“Almost a decade ago, as Hillary Clinton ran for re-election to the Senate on her way to seeking the presidency for the first time, the New York Times reported on her unusually close relationship with Corning, Inc., an upstate glass titan. Clinton advanced the company's interests, racking up a big assist by getting China to ease a trade barrier. And the firm's mostly Republican executives opened up their wallets for her campaign.

During Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, Corning lobbied the department on a variety of trade issues, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The company has donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to her family's foundation. And, last July, when it was clear that Clinton would again seek the presidency in 2016, Corning coughed up a $225,500 honorarium for Clinton to speak.”

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/16/8614881/Hillary-Clinton-took-money

Even the American Institute of Architects. . .

Pillows and Politics--the price we pay

This morning I was changing the sheets on the bed at the cottage, and realized the pillows I purchased in early June were coming apart and shrinking. They look like they are half the size they were just 6 weeks ago. Admittedly, they were cheapies. Maybe $3-$4 dollars at K-Mart. But when I bought them, they felt and looked just like the $6 (whoopee) kind. They seem to be made of layers that come apart. So I switched them with the older pillows (maybe 20 years old) from the guest room, which I think are what we used before. I used to always use a down pillow, but after my rotator cuff problems in the 90s (I'm not an athlete, but librarians lift a lot of heavy material) I found foam more comfortable.

The opposite is true in politics. There too, you get what They pay for, but it is the heavy donors and lobbyists contributing massive amounts that override your common sense when you go into the polling place. The big corporations--energy, health, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing--knew who to spend on this last go around. How do you think they became the players? They do that not out of political or economic philosophy--socialism, marxism, capitalism, etc.--but because then they can influence regulation. In order to be at the top of the heap for cap and trade, or universal health care, or wind or coal, they need to be in a position to 1) influence the administration which appears to be in charge, and 2) destroy all the smaller firms, corporations, businesses, and non-profits which might be interested in the health and wellfare of the American people. And then of course, there is the foreign vote money. We all know it's out there, we just don't know who, what, when, or where, and since we no longer have responsible, investigative journalism, we'll probably never know.

The Gangster Government

We're used to cronyism in government and the workplace. But this is much worse. Now we've got 20 czars who report only to Obama running the government instead of elected officials. Czar is the Russian word for Caesar, and the former General Motors, The Government Motors, is now Gangster Motors. Folks, Obama is a marxist; until recently I thought he was too smart to go the Russian route, but this all looks awfully familiar if you've ever studied the Soviet Union.



HT Murray.