Modulator

campaign fundraising racket

bush is busy gathering funds into his campaign treasury. This WaPO article talks about it and Skimble summarizes one aspect of it like this::

So if you are a supplier or subcontractor of Merrill Lynch's, you would undoubtedly be "receptive" to Merrill Lynch's suggestion that you donate to Bush-Cheney 2004 in the same way that any supplier of Tony Soprano's would be to a request for contributions to his pet political cause. They call it "bundling" - we call it "extortion."

It's only 2003, and already Merrill Lynch has loosened $265,000 from its network. Imagine what they'll come up with next year.

This process is not unique to bush and his cronies. The whole election process seems to have devolved to an issue of who can be bought buy the most votes rather then who is most qualified to serve the citizens. Skimble also wonders why a firm that aided and abetted Enron has not met a fate closer to that of Arthur Anderson:

Merrill Lynch has cut a deal that ensures it will not meet the same fate as the scapegoat firm of Arthur Andersen, which acted not only as Enron's auditor, but also Halliburton's while Dick Cheney was CEO. Killing two birds with one stone, as it were. Under the politico-plutocratic logic of the Bush administration, Andersen the auditor was dispensable; Merrill Lynch the wealth manager is not

This is a good question and I wonder just how many other similar cooked deals are waiting to see the light of day.

Posted by Steve on September 19, 2003