Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2010, 09:21 AM
 
58,958 posts, read 27,261,820 times
Reputation: 14265

Advertisements

I am NOT for public paid campaigns.

I believe as a free country we have the right to donate WHATEVER we want for our candidate of choice, as long as ALL contributions are made public, IMMEDIATLEY upon reciept of that donation.

Openness is the key. it doesn't matter if it ia a single person, a union, a Corp. a 501 C etc. ALL donations.

Soros should not be able to hide the millions he gives. The ABA, the NEA, UAW, GE, and every othe company or person should be open to the day of light.

 
Old 09-25-2010, 06:24 PM
 
6,084 posts, read 6,039,842 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
I am NOT for public paid campaigns.

I believe as a free country we have the right to donate WHATEVER we want for our candidate of choice, as long as ALL contributions are made public, IMMEDIATLEY upon reciept of that donation.

Openness is the key. it doesn't matter if it ia a single person, a union, a Corp. a 501 C etc. ALL donations.

Soros should not be able to hide the millions he gives. The ABA, the NEA, UAW, GE, and every othe company or person should be open to the day of light.
The Soros family wants the Dems off their payroll.

"So to help make their case to House Democratic leaders, advocates of stricter campaign financing laws have enlisted a roster of about 60 of the biggest donors to the House Democratic campaign committee — donors like Jonathan Soros, son of the billionaire financier George Soros; Douglas Durst, the New York real estate magnate; and Herb Sandler, the banker-turned-philanthropist."

And do you also believe the foreign special interests of Saudi Arabia, Chavez and communist China also should have their brib,....., er "free speech" protected?
 
Old 09-25-2010, 06:42 PM
 
58,958 posts, read 27,261,820 times
Reputation: 14265
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
The Soros family wants the Dems off their payroll.

"So to help make their case to House Democratic leaders, advocates of stricter campaign financing laws have enlisted a roster of about 60 of the biggest donors to the House Democratic campaign committee — donors like Jonathan Soros, son of the billionaire financier George Soros; Douglas Durst, the New York real estate magnate; and Herb Sandler, the banker-turned-philanthropist."

And do you also believe the foreign special interests of Saudi Arabia, Chavez and communist China also should have their brib,....., er "free speech" protected?
WOW, did you just discover you can bold your postings?

Duh, foreign donations are against the law. Openness would stop them.
 
Old 09-25-2010, 06:53 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,810,437 times
Reputation: 18304
Bascailly the supreme court put that down the tubes as a idea.
 
Old 09-26-2010, 08:09 PM
 
6,084 posts, read 6,039,842 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
WOW, did you just discover you can bold your postings?
All it takes is a bolded paragraph to wow you huh? Not surprising getting that kind of reaction from you.

Since I have used that style throughout the entire thread, you've pretty much revealed that you either too lazy or incapable of reading and understanding my posts and just like mouthing off about subjects you know absolutely NOTHING about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
Duh, foreign donations are against the law. Openness would stop them.
Not too surprising you would make this kind of flat out wrong statement, given your limited knowledge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
It is quite the coincidence that after recently making a thread to find out how Tea Party members felt about the SCOTUS ruling that I happened to stumble across this gem of an article.

"Not much has been heard on this alarming topic so far from the "tea party patriots" or any of the other usual right-wing suspects, however. Their flag-flapping ire tends to be directed against Democrats and liberals only."

"Actually, the Republican attorneys and the justices themselves reviewed this issue, at least glancingly, during the course of argument in the landmark case. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg and John Paul Stevens, who happen to have been appointed by Democrats, asked whether foreign corporate interests would be able to funnel money into American elections through their U.S. subsidiaries if the court struck down law and precedent to allow unlimited corporate political spending. The reply came from Theodore Olson, who first gained notoriety as the lawyer for the secretive anti-Clinton Arkansas Project and has lately distinguished himself as a libertarian advocate for gay marriage. "I would not rule that out," he admitted."

"Unsurprisingly, the majority opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy simply failed to address the problem. Why draw attention to the bad news when you're overturning a century of precedent."

WTF, . Okay, calm down, take a breath. I mean c'mon, corporations are people too right. And these are American corporations, so it can't be all that bad right?

"Justice Samuel Alito noted during the September arguments that foreign-owned media corporations have the same First Amendment rights that American companies do."

"Haley Barbour, then chairman of the Republican National Committee, hatched a complicated loan scheme that laundered $2 million from a Hong Kong businessman through a GOP "think tank" and into his party’s congressional campaigns.
Barbour clearly knew that the money came from foreign sources and appeared to have lied to the committee about the matter. When the Senate hearings began, John Glenn, then a Democratic senator from Ohio, offered a pithy summary of Barbour’s behavior: "As far as I know, [this] is the only [case] where the head of a national political party knowingly and successfully solicited foreign money, infused it into the election process, and intentionally tried to cover it up." The Young scheme used a Florida subsidiary of his company -- which boasted Gerald Ford as a director! -- to conceal its foreign origin.
Today he is governor of Mississippi, where his penchant for influence peddling has served him well – and he is now a widely touted prospect for the Republican ticket in 2012.
"

Okay, no more rationalizations, no more weaving and dodging. Enough of the smokescreens, enough of the theatrics. Its reality check time.

Where is the Right Populist outrage? Where are the angry party members now? Where are the Patriots?

The right wing majority of the SCOTUS has just put America up for sale to the highest bidder. Are Limbaugh, Beck, Fox News blasting the SCOTUS ruling?

Well at least the threat of an attack on US soil has finally been neutralized.

Communist China, socialist Europe, oil rich Venezuelan & Sharia, fundamentalists Islamic regimes can now all legally buy their own piece of the American pie.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bin laden and the rest of Qaeda willingly turn themselves in. With his rich Saudi oil connections, he would not only be pardoned (after a substantial brib,..,er,.. contribution to Presidential candidates of course), I bet the court would reward HIM with the ransom money for turning himself in.

God Bless America, the best pasture totalitarians and dictators can buy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
As long as politicians have a forced dependency on foreign multi-nationals due to record breaking million dollar races, we will continue to have more bail outs and explosions.

"But even as BP's reputation suffers -- through more disclosures of cost-cutting measures that endangered the lives of the workers on the rig that are the subject of a federal criminal investigations and amid new revelations about the company's role in lobbying the British government to release Libyan prisoners including the Lockerbie bomber -- at least 20 members of Congress appear to be keeping money the company has contributed to them since December 2009."
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Bascailly the supreme court put that down the tubes as a idea.
Since many tea partiers claim they respect the Constitution and its Framers so much, they should follow in their footsteps and accomplish the one amendment that did not make it through.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
That's exactly what some of our Founding Fathers wanted.

"Jefferson and Madison proposed an 11th Amendment to the Constitution that would "ban monopolies in commerce," making it illegal for corporations to own other corporations, banning them from giving money to politicians or trying to influence elections in any way, restricting corporations to a single business purpose, limiting the lifetime of a corporation to something roughly similar to that of productive humans (20 to 40 years back then), and requiring that the first purpose for which all corporations were created be "to serve the public good."
 
Old 09-28-2010, 09:20 PM
 
6,084 posts, read 6,039,842 times
Reputation: 1916
Now is the best time to push forward on campaign finance reform.

"Millions of Americans are being mobilized this week to push the House for a vote on the Fair Elections Now Act as soon as they can get it on the floor," said David Donnelly, campaign manager for the Campaign for Fair Elections. "Across the country, people are telling their members of Congress and House leadership that they want to take elections back from the special interests."

The legislation has the support of 165 House members, including lead sponsors Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), and Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.).

Meanwhile off of Capitol Hill, 27 wealthy donors have vowed to withhold campaign contributions from any lawmakers who fail to support the Fair Elections legislation."
 
Old 09-30-2010, 08:50 AM
 
6,084 posts, read 6,039,842 times
Reputation: 1916
If this is not a wake up call, I don't know what is.

"Appearing on the first installment of a series called "Follow the Money," the lobbyist, Jimmy Williams, a principal at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP, said corporations and interest groups often do not report to the IRS the large amounts of money they give to lawmakers and political action committees, choosing instead to pay a nominal fine. The money goes into a "black hole," Williams said, perpetuating a system he called "corrupt." In 2009, the congressional publication The Hill named Williams one of capital's top corporate lobbyists."
 
Old 10-06-2010, 07:49 PM
 
6,084 posts, read 6,039,842 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
Now is the best time to push forward on campaign finance reform.

"Millions of Americans are being mobilized this week to push the House for a vote on the Fair Elections Now Act as soon as they can get it on the floor," said David Donnelly, campaign manager for the Campaign for Fair Elections. "Across the country, people are telling their members of Congress and House leadership that they want to take elections back from the special interests."

The legislation has the support of 165 House members, including lead sponsors Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), and Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.).

Meanwhile off of Capitol Hill, 27 wealthy donors have vowed to withhold campaign contributions from any lawmakers who fail to support the Fair Elections legislation."
Okay Pelosi, you talk the talk but now its time to show and prove.

Push public campaign finance reform already damn it!!!

"In an interview with The Huffington Post on Tuesday, Pelosi said she was unsure how much help Democrats will get from outside political groups that the Supreme Court has ruled can spend without limit on federal elections, and House Democratic candidates have grown increasingly nervous as corporate money pours into district after district, while union money and help from environmental and women's rights groups has been much more restrained. "
 
Old 10-14-2010, 12:52 PM
 
6,084 posts, read 6,039,842 times
Reputation: 1916
Old Man Fritz, once again warning us that our democracy is in danger but its not too late to be saved.

"Money, a growing cancer in politics, needs to be excised. In my seventh election to the United States Senate in 1998, I had to raise $8.5 million. $8.5 million factors to $30,000 a week, each week, every week, for six years. It's not just raising campaign funds the year ahead of the election any more. In order to raise this sum, you have to travel the country and still depend on Washington assistance. To get that assistance you have to raise money for other Senators who are up during the six years in order to get their assistance when you're up. Thus, the beginning of Washington influence on local elections. Tip O'Neill's rule that: "All politics is local," has changed to "most politics is national." The national media and pundits have taken over campaigns.

Once the Constitution is amended, Congress can provide limits, public financing, control corporate contributions, or whatever. But the first amendment for freedom of speech would be restored its meaning. Special interests would be limited. Lobbyists would be limited, losing control. National Committees would be limited so that the States' needs could be addressed. The Senator would now have time for the country instead of the campaign. Federalism and the strength of democracy would be restored. The corruption of government would end."
 
Old 10-14-2010, 03:01 PM
 
58,958 posts, read 27,261,820 times
Reputation: 14265
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
All it takes is a bolded paragraph to wow you huh? Not surprising getting that kind of reaction from you.

Since I have used that style throughout the entire thread, you've pretty much revealed that you either too lazy or incapable of reading and understanding my posts and just like mouthing off about subjects you know absolutely NOTHING about.



Not too surprising you would make this kind of flat out wrong statement, given your limited knowledge.







Since many tea partiers claim they respect the Constitution and its Framers so much, they should follow in their footsteps and accomplish the one amendment that did not make it through.


Wow me? I don't think so. The only one wowed by you is yourself.
You have been bolding for quite a while now and this is probably the first time I have responded to you. Probably because you think you are sooo smarter than anyone else. PS. You aren't


You have been de-bunked so many times it is not worth my time to carry on a conversation with you.

You can't have conversation without resorting to juvenile name calling and trying to belittle anyone who disagrees with you.

Have fun with yourself.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:08 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top