You quote my point accurately, agree with it, and then appear to miss it entirely! I’ll try again:
It is not immoral to use LEGAL campaign contributions to support a candidate that will further one’s political interests. In fact, the reason it is legal, is because it is an extension of free speech and indistinguishable from free speech.
Just as being taller, having a louder voice, or owning a microphone or publishing company cannot and should not be outlawed as an unfair political advantage, neither should having more money to contribute to the candidate who will represent one’s interests.
The immorality is introduced when a candidate betrays potential voters by misrepresenting positions or intentions (lies, bears false witness), while promising the opposite to super PAC contributors behind closed doors.
Voters should be wary when a politician is receiving large contributions from sources who have interests in conflict with their own interests.
Neither the donors nor the politicians politicians are doing anything wrong unless they lie about it. Lying is wrong.
If Donald Trump contributed to various politicians hoping to have them on his side, that’s free speech. If the politician secretly promised to serve Trump’s interests by doing one thing, while promising voters the opposite thing, then that’s a lie.
“It is not immoral to use LEGAL campaign contributions to support a candidate that will further one’s political interests.”
I never said it was immoral. I said if Cruz gets these campaign contributions, he’s bought and paid for and we hate him and the corporations that support him. But when Trump did it, we don’t hate that.