Follow the Money

I've had two chats recently, one with an area resident and the other with a television producer, who both, independently, agreed on how to understand things that don't seem to make much sense.  I don't remember either's exact words, but they came down to, "Follow the money!"  Increasingly, I think this is so.

Why is there such reluctance on the part of the current administration to label Islamic extremists/terrorists, well, "Islamic extremists/terrorists?"  I guess I'm thinking now of the kidnapped Nigerian girls' situation.  But I also see how the administration refuses to called the Ft. Hood shootings an act of terrorism, despite all of the overt evidence, clinging to "workplace violence."  And what is the continued embrace of so many of the Middle Eastern despots, who rule by imposing Shar'ia standards?  (Isn't a Christian girl who is pregnant in one of them now facing the possibility of death, based on Islamic law, Shar'ia?)  Can it be that many of these folks, such as the Sultan of Brunei, are heavy contributions to Obama, the Clintons, and the Democratic Party?  (They might well also contribute to the Republicans, I don't know.  But I wouldn't be surprised at the Establishment Republicans.)  Gee, what is it either of the Clintons get for a speech in the Middle East--almost half a million dollars?  Who would criticize anyone who is willing to pay $500,000 for a speech, just to remain principled?  I guess I assume too much--that people still have principles.  Let's follow the money.

(Interesting in that those who have opposed the recent Supremes' rulings on political contributions haven't made a peep--at least none I've heard--about foreign campaign/political contributions.  Hmmm......)

Why would anyone opposed the Keystone XL pipeline?  OK, the radical environmentalists do.  (I won't get into their hypocrisy in many of there lives, not today.)  But who does such opposition help and who does it hurt?  And consider these in light of the current administration.  China is helped; so is Venezuela.  Why would the US--or at least its President--want to help either of those countries?  Let's toss in Russia, in light of the Ukrainian situation.  So are that California billionaire hedge-fund guy (Hey, aren't those guys supposed to be the bad guys?  Oh, not if they contribute hundreds of millions to right, er, the left cause.) and Warren Buffett (And where do his political contributions go?).  (So, then what's so different about the Koch Brothers, other than they give to the "wrong" causes?)  Americans, that is, you and me are hurt.  US workers are hurt.  Canada, a loyal ally, is hurt.  Hmmm......  Shall we follow the money?