Consider this: Earlier this week the Supreme Court ruled a very important case. McCutcheon v FEC was brought by Shaun McCutcheon along with the RNC. It challenged the aggregate limits for donors to candidates and party committees. In short, the Court agreed that limits on how many candidates or committees a person may support was unconstitutional and a burden on core First Amendment political activities.
According to RNC Committee man John Ryder “While there is no evidence that this will increase the amount of money in the political process overall – current base limits of $32,400 to committees and $5,200 to candidates will remain in effect – it’s very likely to increase the amount donors give to candidates and parties who maintain full disclosure available for anyone to see on the internet. Given how many competitive races there are, after this decision donors will no longer have to pick between candidates and committees they want to support. This could allow donors to support more Republican candidates in the coming months of the 2014 campaign.”
GOP Chairman Reince Priebus added “When free speech is allowed to flourish, our democracy is stronger.”
The Democrats immediately reacted by howling about the influence of too much money in campaigns, even though they have the big money donors in their corner, plus the free use and promotion of the media. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid railed against their pet hatred for the Koch Brothers (a bit player in funds compared to George Soros, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, etc.). Our own newspaper had an editorial denigrating the Court’s ruling. Liberals still upset about the Court’s Citizens United case that also freed up moneys to candidates are even more furious.
Fine. But did you notice what happened next? It’s a pure example of how the Left works.
A few days later the case of the Mozilla CEO who gave a measly $1,000 to the California ballot initiative promoting traditional marriage, was ousted from his post. Someone dug into campaign donor releases to find this and make an example of him.
Coincidence? I think not.
Outing him means the Democrats put the fear of retribution into every CEO’s mind. It is a back door way of stopping contributions to the Right. Who would want to risk their career for a political donation? Most will not. Most will stay silent.
That’s how our side is quieted. That’s how it’s done. Not by anything overt; they do it via the back door or by intimidation. The Progressives have had a hundred years to form their playbook, so it is no surprise they figure out how to react immediately. They know what works and how to cover their tracks.
President Obama will rail against this ruling to his constituents and to the media. But behind the scenes he will work to undo the Court’s ruling.
It’s not right, but it works.
I don’t want our side to act underhandedly, but I do wish we had a playbook to follow. Obviously, we don’t.