Panic In DC As Starbucks’ Schultz Calls For CEO Boycott Of Campaign Donations, Urges Americans To Go On Strike Against Their Politicians
by Tyler Durden
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: Schultz’s most recent donation was the $2,500 maximum to Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) in March. He’s also given thousands in previous cycles to Democrats including President Barack Obama, and one-time Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. He’s 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).