Problems with the EXXON CEO as Secretary of State

Those ties themselves are problematic.  How can we have a Secretary of State with such known biases on behalf of a particular country, let alone one that has been our adversary?  But this looks especially bad since his nomination came just days after the CIA charges that Russia influenced our election in order to help Trump get elected.  True or not, Tillerman’s nomination contributes to the narrative that the Russians are taking over our government.
(3)  The appearance of plutocracy.  There are people on both the left and the right who say that our democracy is a sham because our country is really run by the big corporations.  Trump’s packing his cabinet with billionaires, Wall Street tycoons, and corporation CEOs plays right into that.
Trump hammered Hillary Clinton for giving speeches to Goldman-Sachs.  But he has appointed three Goldman-Sachs executives to his administration.  He owes his election to blue-collar workers the Democrats have ignored, but where is an advocate for that demographic in his administration?
Maybe the Trump phenomenon is just the return of the old pre-Reagan country club Republicans.  After all, Trump builds country clubs.  The Rockefeller Republicans were the party of big business, throwing in some socially liberal noblesse oblige.  
I had greater hopes than this.  Somebody, please, convince me that I’m wrong to worry.

Megabrewery–no, gigabrewery

We have microbreweries that make small-batch craft beers.  We have macrobreweries that make the mass-produced brands like Budweiser and Miller.  But now Budweiser and Miller, or rather the global corporations that now control them both, are working on a merger!  That would result in a megabrewery.  No, since this conglomerate would make a one third of the world’s beer supply, it would have to be called a gigabrewery!

If the merger could pass all of the regulatory and anti-trust hurdles, that is.  Here is a list of beers that would come under this vast corporate umbrella, including lots of foreign stalwarts and brews that purists find acceptable.  (Both corporations have been buying up smaller breweries.)  Details of the proposed deal after the jump. [Read more…]

Corporate America’s alliance with cultural left

Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal says that corporate America is foolish to ally with leftists in opposing religious liberty in the name of gay marriage:

Referring to the recent events surrounding Indiana’s Religious Liberty Restoration Act, Jindal said corporate America teamed up with the radical left “to come after our religious liberty rights.” Jindal warned, “Corporate America needs to be careful because the same radical left that doesn’t want us to have religious liberty rights does not want us to have economic liberty rights. The same radical left that doesn’t want us to have religious liberty rights wants to tax and regulate these companies out of existence. They think profit is a dirty word.”

More from Jindal’s speech after the jump.  So why do you think the big corporations have joined  the pro-gay cause?

[Read more…]

Economic discrimination

Apple, Angie’s List, and other companies were threatening to boycott the state of Indiana, thinking its Religious Freedom statute would allow businesses to discriminate against gays.  In doing so, these companies were saying that they have the right to act on their managers’ sincerely held beliefs that they should not do business with those they disapprove of.  But this is exactly what the bakers, photographers, and florists who do not approve of participating in gay marriage want to do!  Why should corporations be allowed to discriminate against an entire state, due to their conflicting beliefs, and individuals not be allowed to?  So observes Jordan Ballor, excerpted after the jump. [Read more…]

Corporations aren’t funding campaigns after all?

When the Supreme Court ruled that the law limiting corporate contributions was an infringement of the right to free speech, the conventional wisdom was–and is–that now big businesses will buy politicians by funding their elections.  But it hasn’t turned out that way.  Corporations aren’t giving much money at all to political candidates.

The ruling allowing unlimited “corporate” giving–“corporate” meaning collective organizations, not just business corporations–is indeed magnifying the reach of  issue-driven organizations, which would be in accord with free political speech.  And wealthy individuals, such as George Soros and the Koch brothers (notice how those who demonize one don’t demonize the other), can throw their weight around with their money.  One might still worry about the influence of campaign contributions.  But the point here is that business corporations are not, on the whole, giving many political contributions.  They have found that giving money to politicians can just alienate some of their customers and that they can get more influence for their buck by hiring lobbyists. [Read more…]

Big corporations support gay marriage

Belying the leftist myth that big corporations are conservative,  379 major businesses filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting gay marriage for when the Supreme Court hears arguments on the issue on April 28. [Read more…]