Well the Democrats tried a second time in less than 24 hours to push through the DISCLOSE Act which would force unions, nonprofits and corporate interest groups that spend $10,000 or more during an election cycle to disclose donors who give more than $10,000. They failed, even after 16 senators held the floor for six hours on Monday evening. The vote was on party lines 53-45, falling short of the 60 votes needed to break the Republican filibuster.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse claimed, “When somebody is spending the kind of money that is being spent, a single donor making, for instance, a $4 million anonymous contribution, they're not doing that out of the goodness of their heart."

So Senator Whitehouse knows what people think now, is that what we are to believe? Democrats have to be some of the most presumptive people in the world. They think they should make laws based on what people think. In this case it's the "why" political donations are given. Well the truth is that someone could make a $5,000 donation and Mr. Whitehouse still wouldn't have a clue if it was because they were giving out of the "goodness of their heart" or whether it was given to pander to a candidate.

However, it was Democrat Chuck Schumer who took to the floor and declared,

I believe there ought to be limits because the First Amendment is not absolute. No amendment is absolute. You can’t scream ‘fire’ falsely in a crowded theater. We have libel laws. We have anti-pornography laws. All of those are limits on the First Amendment. Well, what could be more important than the wellspring of our democracy? And certain limits on First Amendment rights that if left unfettered, destroy the equality — any semblance of equality in our democracy — of course would be allowed by the Constitution. And the new theorists on the Supreme Court who don’t believe that, I am not sure where their motivation comes from, but they are just so wrong. They are just so wrong.

Understand that we don't need all of this put in place. We don't need a sequel to McCain/Feingold. The people can simply demand from those who run for office to see their donations and if they don't want to provide them, fine. Then the people can just simply say if you aren't going to be transparent we aren't going to vote for you. It's as simple as that.

Everyone knows that when it comes to presidential races both sides receive big contributions and in many cases they receive from the same sources. If a law is put in place that demands that these donors are made public, along with their donations, I wonder if Mr. Whitehouse could then tell us if it comes from the "goodness of their hearts" and whether it would please Mr. Schumer that he forced them to tell how much they gave. I suggest Schumer speak to his boss, Mr. Transparent himself, and see if Obama will go ahead and just disclose all his donors and their donations without a law. See how far that gets him. In fact, to make it a bit more amusing, why doesn't Senator Schumer go ahead and lead by example and do the same thing. I won't hold my breath.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.