Skip to comments.Panic In DC As Starbucks' Schultz Calls For CEO Boycott Of Campaign Donations
Posted on 08/15/2011 12:11:43 PM PDT by Zakeet
Full title: Panic In DC As Starbucks' Schultz Calls For CEO Boycott Of Campaign Donations, Urges Americans To Go On Strike Against Their Politicians
In today's most underreported news of the day, which could potentially have the biggest impact on the future of America, none other than America's CEOs, or at least one of them: Starbucks' Howard Schultz, has mass blasted an email to fellow CEOs asking for a consensual boycott on donating to political campaigns in order to encourage the nation's muppets, elsewhere idiotically called "leaders", to solve America's budget and debt impasse. Bloomberg quotes from the CEO's e-mail to business leaders:"I am asking that all of us forego political contributions until the Congress and the President return to Washington and deliver a fiscally disciplined long-term debt and deficit plan to the American people." Cue panic, terror, homicidal and suicidal screeching, and overall sheer existential angst in D.C., whose critters suddenly face the nightmare scenario of having no corporate bribes, period, until they get to do their job.
Should Schultz' proposal gain traction, this could be the most revolutionary proposal to leadership reform since the advent of the corporatocracy. Yet as optimistic and idealistic as we are, we fail to see how corporations will all join into this mass game theory experiment, where the benefits for defection get exponentially greater as more and more people join and decide to cooperate. Oh well, it was a great idea while it lasted. And as for Schultz' own donation record, here is Politico: Schultzs most recent donation was the $2,500 maximum to Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) in March. Hes also given thousands in previous cycles to Democrats including President Barack Obama, and one-time Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. Hes also given to Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.)." At least some democrats are certainly sweating it if Schultz decideds to proceed unilaterally with this threat (unless of course it is nothing more than a PR stunt).
Once again, should this idea gain traction, it may prove to be the most (r)evolutionary development in US politics in decades. Which is precisely why we are confident it will never be mentioned again: good luck getting Wall Street firms, for whom 80% of their business model is bribing their DC muppets with pocket change, to pledge their participation in this program.
Fortunately, we Democraps still own the unions, Main Stream Media, Hollyweird, George Soros, and a gazillion poorly educated minorities!
buyer’s remorse. like when I once bought a Starbutts.
Sounds great. But statistics prove that for a few hundred thou in campaign cash they can get shady deals through Congress that are worth billions to them. The Cost/Benefit math is just too strong.
Not one of my corporate clients would have had the guts to do this. They all live in fear of gummint (for some pretty good reasons).
About time for these CEO’s get on board the Tea Party Express.
Howie Schultz is a Dem contributer (70% Dem, 1% Repub) whose contributions have gone mostly to Patty Murray (Chair of the committee BTW) with others to Hillary AND Obama.
He's no good.
Whether it’s the carrot or the stick, you are correct. Schultz will be alone on this one.
Will Starbucks be the scene of the next flash mob/robbery?
1) only individual US citizens in good standing may donate
2) contributors must furnish picture Id
3) political orgs/candidates must keep records of contributions
4) dollar limit is $2,000 per individual per year
Good try, but we are so deep in crony capitalism that I don’t see this going anywhere.
You think Immelt of GE would go along with this, or Buffet, or the google guy?
Anyway, all that congress would have to do is call them up to testify on some idiotic thing and the spigots would magically reopen.
Frees up more money for them to hire lobbyists. Experience has shown politicians are pretty much interchangeable.
That would be true campaign finance reform.
Urges Americans To Go On Strike Against Their Politiciansgood idea.
Obama Turns Blind Eye to Credit Card Donation Fraud
What do Bart Simpson, Family Guy, Daffy Duck, King Kong, O.J. Simpson and Raela Odinga have in common?
All are celebrities; and with the exception of Odinga and O.J. Simpson, they also are fictional characters. And yet, all of them gave money earlier this month to the campaign of Barack Obama, without any apparent effort by the campaign to screen them out as suspect donors.
The Obama fundraising machine may owe its sensational success in part to a relaxation of standard online merchant security practices, which has allowed illegal donations from foreign donors and from unknown individuals using anonymous gift cards, industry analysts and a confidential informant tell Newsmax.
**OBAMAS FOREIGN DONORS: THE MEDIA AVERTS ITS EYES**
(He accepts credit cards including Macys.)
**Fictitious Donors Found in Obama Finance Records**
just more laws to be ignored. while the presstitutes look the other way.
George Will’s list (paraphrased) from some years ago:
1) No limits.
2) No foreign money.
3) Full (and timely) disclosure.
That is, let any legitimate American source contribute whatever they want to whomever they want, but that information is in the public domain to potentially be used against the recipients.
I believed in that too, right up until the California gay marriage initiative (was it Proposition 8?) where the gays got the names of donors supporting traditional marriage through public records, and used the information to harrass them at home and at work.
He’s barking up the wrong triple espresso latte mocha grande.
Since DC funnels trillions in taxpayer bucks and tries to regulate just about everything, the surprise is that campaign contributions only total in the low billions.
Reducing the size and scope of the federal government is our only hope.
Starbucks allows concealed firearms in their stores even though they were attacked by the anti-gun lobby for it.