Should Someone Go Explain Things to Representative Alexander?

You know, I’m kind of used to reading things about Tennessee politics that make my head cock to the side like a dog that hears a noise she can’t quite figure out. “Ba-roo?” I ask.

But this may be, honest to god, the most baffling thing I’ve read all day.

Here’s the background. Republicans put forth a bill allowing corporations to donate money directly to political campaigns. Representative Alexander (R-Jack Daniels, though he seems to not get that) voted for that bill. Governor Baby just yesterday signed it into law.

Let me repeat: thanks to Republicans, corporations can donate money directly to political campaigns.

Jack Daniels is a part of a multinational corporation. It is the only industry in Moore County, which Representative Alexander represents.

And Representative Alexander, bless his heart, is saying today, the day after the Governor signed the very bill into law that he voted for which lets corporations donate directly to political campaigns, that he wants to bring forth legislation to charge Jack Daniels a barrel tax, a tax no other distillery in the state would have to pay.

I can’t wait to see how this is going to go. Do you think the dudes at Jack Daniels just laughed when they read this or did they also go “Ba-roo?” I imagine it went “What? The? Fuck?” and then there was laughter. I mean, how much “fuck you” money do you think Brown-Forman has? Certainly enough to get someone other than Alexander elected. Shoot, certainly enough to throw some against every single person who dares even make positive noises in the direction of this bill.  Does Alexander not get this?

Are Republicans who’ve been around the block a time or two purposefully letting newbie Republicans fuck up this bad? Is there not a mentoring program or something?

I don’t know. It’s strange.

9 thoughts on “Should Someone Go Explain Things to Representative Alexander?

  1. i read about this elsewhere that moore county wants this tax. surely the folks at jd must be ok with it since they probably control the local pols

  2. If they didn’t before, they do now. But I don’t think they’re cool with this, considering they’re fighting the same tax in Kentucky.

    But why stir bad feelings locally when you can just make it not happen at the state level?

  3. It’s kinda a trend that you see somewhat often with Republican politicians though. I’ll guarantee you that Rep. Alexander fully felt he was simply voting for corporations to give money TO HIM. It never even entered his mind that they might give money to his opponent.

    Sorta like those who vote to restrict the religious liberty of Muslims (particularly and other non-christian groups more generally), without realizing that those laws also protect the religious liberty of Christians. Or when they swear the proliferation of guns makes us safer, until someone turns one on a politician. Or when they fight non-descrimination policies for GLBT people, then turn around and sue on religious discrimination grounds. It just never occurs to them that the same rules that are there to protect others are there to protect them too.

  4. So Tennesseans are now ok with their elections being controlled by foreign interests? Like, duh — isn’t Toyota still mostly held in Japan? And Volkswagen is German, init? So, if they want something like (shhhh…) more sane civic equality laws for their employees, then couldn’t they apply a little economic muscle to make that happen? True, perhaps they aren’t into polishing turds and would just as soon relocate once their tax breaks expire, but if they wanted to mess with it, sounds like you’ve just given them carte blanche.

  5. Dolphin, I think that’s true in many cases. It just never occurs to them that the things that can be used to help them can be used to help their opponents or vise versa.

    Bridgett, it’s stunning, but, yeah. For some reason they don’t realize that both our political parties are pretty pro-business. They believe that Republicans=pro-business and Democrats=pro-disgusting riffraff, so it doesn’t seem to be occurring to them that their laws don’t HAVE to benefit them.

  6. Freedom= corporations donate dircetly to candidates in unlimited amounts and have the rights of individuals. Employees (and stockholders, for that matter) of those corpoattaions hahve no say whatsoever, in where that political money goes. Legislators are de facto employees of those corporations, with a few minor exceptions having to do with official church policies of the state.

    Unions, on the other hand, may not collect dues for political purposes, or, to the extent state Right to Be Screwed laws allow, engage in collective bargaining, or in any other way assemble enough push back power ever to challenge the rights of the Free Individuals known as corporations above. And these Free Individuals can hide their guns while drinking.

  7. I have a theory that the old school Republicans have a “give ’em enough rope” policy towards the Tea-Party/Jesus Fringe newbies. With the Campfields (yeah, I know this isn’t about him) and other assorted idiots running around, the grown-ups in the GOP have a group they can point to and say how “moderate” they are by comparison.

  8. Yeah, I think that’s absolutely right. I wonder if these assorted idiots have any idea that they’ll be as fair game in redistricting as the Dems?

    That’s going to be a really fun realization to watch dawn.

  9. Since Sar mentioned Campfield this seems like the appropriate place. I just want to high five the guy that wrote the food truck story in today’s City Paper. Any one that can slip in a dig on Campfield into a story about food trucks deserves my admiration.

Comments are closed.