Flip flop Obama changes tune on Super PAC money, now supports Citizen United
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most people knew that Obama was going to win, so did Wall Street, that's why they gave more to Obama.
Democrats support regulating Wall Street. Republicans do not favor regulating Wall Street. We can stop pretending that Republican policies don't favor Wall Street.
Excuses. Obama crushed McCain in $$$ and will do the same once again. What did Clinton do to regulate wall street? What has Obama done?
– The roar of the revolving door. In his Monday announcement, Messina bragged about how the White House has enacted “sweeping” reforms to “close the revolving door between government and lobbyists.” In truth, the administration has widened the carousel and removed the brakes. The Obama-cheerleading Fishwrap of Record (The New York Times) itself identified at least 15 bundlers “involved in lobbying for Washington consulting shops or private companies.”
Moreover, “at least 68 of 350 Obama bundlers for the 2012 election or their spouses have served in the administration in some capacity; at least 250 of the bundlers visited the White House, and another 30 have ties to companies that conduct business with federal agencies or hope to do so in the future,” according to a recent iWatch News report. Several first-time 2012 bundlers already have snagged administration posts:
And all of this would have been a moot point IF not for..What? Say it with me people.. Citizens.........
Roll your eyes all you want, do you really think two wrongs make a right? Is Obama so weak he chooses to sell influence to the White House and positions to major SUPER PAC bundlers? That should be your questio; or, maybe corruption doesn't bother you as long as it is Obama?
Progressives don't care if they have to run the campaign fueled on puppy blood and bald eagle feathers, they want their goon to win no matter what and if that means flip flopping yet again they'll simply look the other way and smile.
You're due an explanation, I suppose. Since you obviously have no grasp of the situation beyond a partisan talking point.
Year before last, the conservative dominated supreme court ruled in favor of unlimited campaign contributions that can be offered anonomously. They called it "free speech" by a 5-4 decision. Google "citizens united" for the details.
Since the GOP will be receiving huge anonymous contributions, the president is left with two alternatives:
1) hold to his 2008 campaign promise and get buried in a Niagra of negative ads from GOP super pacs recently made legal.
-or-
2) face the new reality and prepare to fight fire with fire.
Any rational individual will see the situation clearly.
Obamaphobes will continue to use misinformation to feed their irrational hatred.
Roll your eyes all you want, do you really think two wrongs make a right? Is Obama so weak he chooses to sell influence to the White House and positions to major SUPER PAC bundlers? That should be your questio; or, maybe corruption doesn't bother you as long as it is Obama?
Let's not be so daft about this. Obama has no choice here. He was against the laws that allow this kind of a playing field, but now that it is a reality, do you think he can afford to just sit there and so nothing while Romney raises a gajillion dollars through his? If this is the way that the powers that be have defined the reelection game, then that's how you have to play it - even if you'd prefer that the rules were different.
What is a true hypocritical statement is to say that it's cool for Romney to raise unlimited funds to assist his reelection fight but that Obama must have his hands tied out of principle.
The playing field has to be level FOR ALL.
If Obama shouldn't be raising millions through super-PAC, then neither should Romney.
If Romney gets to raise those millions, then Obama should as well; indeed, he is forced to.
Roll your eyes all you want, do you really think two wrongs make a right? Is Obama so weak he chooses to sell influence to the White House and positions to major SUPER PAC bundlers? That should be your questio; or, maybe corruption doesn't bother you as long as it is Obama?
If there was no wrong done, there would be no reason to make it right...right
Speaking of corruption, so if Romney wins because of PAC money, you would believe their corrupt as well...right...
Jim Messina, Obama's campaign manager promised Wall Street that Obama would not demonize them or go after them. I'd bet once again Obama trounces the Republicans in donations from Wall Street.
Hypocrisy - it's the only thing liberals excel at other than pilfering the pockets of others to pay for things they won't support themselves.
Keep dodging...you are losing the argument. If it is wrong for Obama, it is wrong for the GOP as well and nothing is going to change that. Did you call out Mitch McConnell as being a "dirty" politican when he stated Citizens United was a blow "for" the First Amendment? How about the Heritage Foundation, the United States Chamber or Commerce, or the NRA...did you have a beef with them also supporting Citizens United? No?
The "do as I say not as I do" mentality from hyper-partisans on the right is killing the credibility of the Republican Party. It's time for Republicans to begin taking accountability for what their own party has done. Pointing fingers and obfuscating the issue with side shows (i.e. this thread) rather than looking at the source of the problem is why this credibility gap exists.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obama's Super-Pac men/women buying influence
