Funeral donation proves need for reform in Cruces


  1. stever says:

    IP the intent of gofdisks link, since it really has nothing to do with Heath’s commentary, is what?  Reading the article its very plain that there are lots of big RED donations compared to very few big blue ones (SO FAR) for the 2012 presidential race.  And maybe, just maybe, that’s bad.  I guess Bill Mattice is just like Newt Gingrich, you know bad and influenced (badly and evilly)by big donors.

    But what is unsaid (thus “incomplete”) is that this reflects the mere fact of there being a contest among Republicans while Obama goes to Chicago for $35,000 a plate fundraisers. With 82% of the votes in the New Hampshire Democratic primary, I think he’s not in need of a big influx right now.

    Both parties, whether through small or large, indirect or direct, individualn or PACs, corporate or union, will raise massive amounts of money to effect the elections and exert influence.  Often the same donor covers both sides. 

  2. IcarusPhoenix says:

    The story qofdisks linked to was the top donors, how much they gave, and who they gave it to.  How is that an incomplete look?  Have we been so jaded by the false dichotomy that mass media tends to think every story requires that you’re seriously asking for a counter-point to math?

  3. stever says:

    MotherJones slants the slants by giving a very incomplete look.  Good job of showing us the DNC talking points

  4. qofdisks says:

    The bribery is so great than the politician$ don’t know what to do with all the bribe$.  This is a fine $tate of affair$.  Los Pinches are choking on it and are forced to co-mingle it to get it down.

  5. EW-aif says:

    Ethics reform, campaign finance reform, publically financed campaigns– all are important issues, but are not very spectacular, “sexy” issues.  It would be of great benefit to all levels of government if we had publically financed campaigns.  Why do we keep on electing people who spend such enormous amounts on campaigns?  Then we wonder why they are so spendthrift with our tax dollars.  They need to be tested with a limited amount of money to spend on reaching out to voters before they are turned loose on the rest of our money.  It is sort of like Ben Franklin’s saying, “A stitch in time saves nine.”

  6. otis says:

       With respect to Mr.Mattice and his family and with no disrespect intended…… there is an old vaudeville schtick about a guy who was known to dislike his brother-in-law intensely. This went on for years and years. They wouldn’t speak at family gatherings, sports events or in casual situations in the small town where they lived. This continued into there old age and finally the brother-in-law passed away. At the funeral the the guy was seen standing over the grave of his brother-in-law after the ceremony. One of his buddies came over and was touched by the final act of forgiveness and told his buddy it was a generous and kind thing to do. The guy looked askance at his buddy and said “Hell, I’m just making sure the SOB is gone.”  Oye.