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.
LoL, funny stuff. It takes about 3 seconds of logical deduction to see through the screams.
1) A non-profit takes in money from its members, a number are foreign national business owners that benefit from globalism.
2) It donates that money to politicians, who all are from one political affiliation.
Is it going to select candidates that a) will appease their membership so they continue to give it money or b) send money to those who don't represent its members interests, including the foreign nationals.
Anyone who passed the 6th grade should figure it out themselves, but some people are slow.
Anyone who doesn't see it and still votes along their contribution lines (especially if their job is at risk by foreign competition) needs a severe mocking. I know I am laughing to the point of crying all the way to the bank. Since mine is not, I invest very heavily globally, and I benefit from cheaper goods made pretty well anywhere from the same stuff. I benefit no matter who wins.
Go America, where you can convince the dumb to vote against their own interests. It's a comedic goldmine.
That's why its such a bad deal that the current law shields the donors--it all needs to be out in the open. What the Chamber specifically is doing may not be illegal AT ALL under the current law, but people have the right to know what's going on, and who's paying for it.
This is a federal crime, gee I wonder why it's not being investigated by a federal agency, but part of internet discussions? I also wonder why accusations of federal crimes by a sitting president aren't drawing interest by these federal agencies as well?
Well... the Fed is actually made up of European Banks...
The government is heavily in debted to foreigners alos. Who do you think buys those treasuries. But if anyone has proof of foreign governament giving campaign funds to either party; I suggest they contact the justice dept because that is illegal. It what happened when Gore spoke to the Chinese during Clinton presidency that raised such a uproar.But no one has made such a acusation to justice vene the presdient. I fact there is proof of nothign as the media has shown in its quetioning of Axlerod who had nne on the anti- chambers blog.It was a blod=g and nothing else really.
The government is heavily in debted to foreigners alos. Who do you think buys those treasuries. But if anyone has proof of foreign governament giving campaign funds to either party; I suggest they contact the justice dept because that is illegal. It what happened when Gore spoke to the Chinese during Clinton presidency that raised such a uproar.But no one has made such a acusation to justice vene the presdient. I fact there is proof of nothign as the media has shown in its quetioning of Axlerod who had nne on the anti- chambers blog.It was a blod=g and nothing else really.
Can't wait to see what he pulls out of his .......hat.
it sure as heck wont be a rabbit. most likely more conspiracy theories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy
George Soros is an American citizen and a success story. What's your beef with him in terms of foreign political campaign contributions?
my beef with soros is in how he made his money. i have no issue with people making money in any of the markets, but when you go all out to make money, and collapse a countries currency at the same time, that is morally wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
Did Bill Clinton lie under oath
i intentionally chopped this quote because this is the main reason clinton was impeached. a lie under oath is in fact a crime in all 50 states, and at the federal level as well. was it enough to get him kicked out of office? no, and i didnt want him out of office either(i did not want president al gore). however it was also enough for the BAR association to revoke clintons license to practice law. in the end i believe the right thing was done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
They thought they could actually trust the word of the President of the United States and the intelligence briefings presented by his administration--you know--that no responsible leader would deliberately lie to lead us into a war.
Guess that theory got blown out of the water fast.
Bush lied? No. The Democrats' investigative report conclusively states otherwise.
You've been suckered by a false and manipulative Dem meme.
in addition, there were many democrats making the same claims bush did as much as tow years BEFORE bush was president.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
That's why its such a bad deal that the current law shields the donors--it all needs to be out in the open. What the Chamber specifically is doing may not be illegal AT ALL under the current law, but people have the right to know what's going on, and who's paying for it.
there is actually good reason for the donor shield laws. imagine if nixon had gotten a hold of a lost of large donors to the campaigns of his opponents, what do you think would have happened? or if FDR got a hold of the lists? or wilson? and even obama? i can tell you that those large donors would be facing legal issues, and irs issues(yes i know the irs wasnt around in wilsons day, doesnt matter wilson would have found a way to retaliate in some manner).
"the controversy over the Chamber of Commerce financing may say more about the Washington spin cycle — where an Internet blog posting can be quickly picked up by like-minded groups and become political fodder for the president himself — than it does about the vagaries of campaign finance."
"Biskup, who had scores of Obama contributions attributed to her, said in an interview that she never donated to the candidate. "That's an error," she said. Moreover, she added, her credit card was never billed for the donations, meaning someone appropriated her name and made the contributions with another card."
"the controversy over the Chamber of Commerce financing may say more about the Washington spin cycle — where an Internet blog posting can be quickly picked up by like-minded groups and become political fodder for the president himself — than it does about the vagaries of campaign finance."
"Biskup, who had scores of Obama contributions attributed to her, said in an interview that she never donated to the candidate. "That's an error," she said. Moreover, she added, her credit card was never billed for the donations, meaning someone appropriated her name and made the contributions with another card."
Obama doesn't sling mud... He states facts... mudslinging is for Republicans...
Accusations are NOT facts.
Where do you get this stuff ?
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.
