The GOP cares solely and exclusively about its rich contributors.

[Yelnoc]

Quite a well-written article.  Really makes me wonder at the future of American democracy.

[Sbane]

And when misinformation isn't enough to sustain popular support for the GOP's agenda, concealment is needed. One fairly innocuous provision in the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill requires public companies to make a more transparent disclosure of CEO compensation, including bonuses. Note that it would not limit the compensation, only require full disclosure. Republicans are hell-bent on repealing this provision. Of course; it would not serve Wall Street interests if the public took an unhealthy interest in the disparity of their own incomes as against that of a bank CEO. As Spencer Bachus, the Republican chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, says, "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks."

Very interesting. Lately Republicans have been getting a hard on about repealing Dodd-Frank, as much as repealing Obamacare, and I never got why that was the case but I guess we know now.

Feel free to correct me if there is a better reason. IIRC another excellent part about the bill is that credit card companies actually have to tell consumers how long it will take to pay of their debts at their usurious rates if they make only minimum payments. Perhaps we should repeal that too.

[Jacobtm]

What would give any indication that the ship is sinking?

Clearly a troll

[Хahar 🤔]

And when misinformation isn't enough to sustain popular support for the GOP's agenda, concealment is needed. One fairly innocuous provision in the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill requires public companies to make a more transparent disclosure of CEO compensation, including bonuses. Note that it would not limit the compensation, only require full disclosure. Republicans are hell-bent on repealing this provision. Of course; it would not serve Wall Street interests if the public took an unhealthy interest in the disparity of their own incomes as against that of a bank CEO. As Spencer Bachus, the Republican chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, says, "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks."

This quote fascinates me because people actually believe this; not just that, but people who are in power believe this. They're not even bothering to hide it. How?

[Jacobtm]

my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks."

This quote fascinates me because people actually believe this; not just that, but people who are in power believe this. They're not even bothering to hide it. How?

$$$

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I love how the article then goes on to talk about all the other things the GOP cares about.

Really it makes no sense to talk about a coalition of interests in a two-party system as having a single motivation. Sure you have people who think that the government is there to serve corporate interests. But then you have others who recognize the unintended consequences of regulatory regimes. And then you have a still larger group who have a general allegiance to what they see as economic freedom and don't distinguish between the rich and the middle class on this. Some who resent the poor for taking their hard earned money, and others who want to empower the poor by reducing regulatory barriers and changing the incentive structure of the safety net. It's a mixed bag, as I'm sure the Democratic Party is as well.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I love how the article then goes on to talk about all the other things the GOP cares about.

Really it makes no sense to talk about a coalition of interests in a two-party system as having a single motivation. Sure you have people who think that the government is there to serve corporate interests. But then you have others who recognize the unintended consequences of regulatory regimes. And then you have a still larger group who have a general allegiance to what they see as economic freedom and don't distinguish between the rich and the middle class on this. Some who resent the poor for taking their hard earned money, and others who want to empower the poor by reducing regulatory barriers and changing the incentive structure of the safety net. It's a mixed bag, as I'm sure the Democratic Party is as well.

You know, the Nazis too weren't ideologically homogenous.
Some of them hated the Jews, some hated the fags, some hated the communists, while others simply wanted to conquer the world and kill as many people as possible.
Certainly they seem like a mixed group to me.

[Sbane]

I love how the article then goes on to talk about all the other things the GOP cares about.

Really it makes no sense to talk about a coalition of interests in a two-party system as having a single motivation. Sure you have people who think that the government is there to serve corporate interests. But then you have others who recognize the unintended consequences of regulatory regimes. And then you have a still larger group who have a general allegiance to what they see as economic freedom and don't distinguish between the rich and the middle class on this. Some who resent the poor for taking their hard earned money, and others who want to empower the poor by reducing regulatory barriers and changing the incentive structure of the safety net. It's a mixed bag, as I'm sure the Democratic Party is as well.

"As Spencer Bachus, the Republican chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, says, "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks."

How can anyone even start to justify a statement like this? Or Barton's statement that getting BP to take responsibility for their oil spill was a "shakedown". At some point you can't just blame the individuals and have to start looking at the bigger picture.

And I do think the problem resides mostly with politicians, rather than with the Republican rank and file. Or at least one can hope.

[opebo]

Every aspect of the structure of society, every act and action of each and every one of us is ordered and designed to benefit solely those with power - such is the nature of the system.  The Republicans serve the rich, the Democrats serve the rich, you and I serve the rich.  The land, the machines, the beasts in the field serve the rich.  The rich are the 'man with the gun', and so much more.. they are the source of all our values and meanings. 

In some ways the Republicans are more 'honest' servants (even with all their absurd Horatio Alger twaddle) than those of us who claim to hate bootlicking.  If you're not actively trying to **** the owners, you're not really 'different'.  And lets face it almost no one is actively trying to do that.