Dana Milbank, at the Washington Post, recently wrote an opinion piece entitled For the GOP, ‘one man, one vote’ becomes ‘one billionaire, one ballot’. I just have one question, why is Dana Milbank lowering himself to such obvious partisan party baiting?
Let me explain. I have noticed in my own little blog that if I write a piece which is snarky and clearly divisive that it generates more traffic. Since most of my readers seem to be somewhat conservative, if the article has a conservative taint, it will get more views. Obviously then, if I want to pander to my readers, I will write more mean spirited, conservative pieces. I don’t because my blog reflects my actual views and I try to write with a certain degree of integrity. What I write is my honest opinion. I only write snarky when I feel that way and the material justifies it. The Moral Middle is not simply a game to see how high I can get the numbers.
Dana Milbank however, seems to be playing the numbers game to win without much regard to integrity. I say that because his piece is so blatantly provocative and reeks of pandering. The title, as well as the article itself, wants to place the onus of the nation’s political campaign reform problem strictly on the GOP; but that is just simply not true. The campaign money issue is a very serious, national problem effecting all parties and needs to be fixed in a bipartisan effort, not used to increase the political divisiveness that is tearing our country apart.
True, Milbank did speculate that Hilary would be facing the same problem if she had some serious challengers. However, he clearly implies, starting with the very title, that the problem currently belongs to the GOP. Dana has taken a very egregious issue and turned it into a political spat. He is redirecting the indignation which should be focused on campaign reform to common party bickering and discord. By making the issue a partisan carrot it lessens the chance that something will actually get done to correct the problem. Perhaps that was his intent, to discredit the issue so that it won’t get fixed? Is this part of a larger campaign to ensure that rich democrats continue to unduly influence American politics? Only time will tell.
The Supreme Court’s ruling that campaign donations are free speech and therefore cannot be constrained has made it easier for Political Action Committees to buy American politics. That allows individuals and business the likes of the Koch Brothers and George Soros to unduly affect the outcome of national elections. Milbank’s one billionaire one ballot is true for all, Democrats and Republicans. That is the problem and it really, really needs to be addressed.
To imply that the problem is constrained to the GOP is pure, unadulterated partisan party baiting! Dana Milbank is simply patronizing, less educated and less intelligent democrats. The scary part is that it may actually work.