If Bain Capital Is So Evil Why Do All These Democrats Take Their Donations?

[blankslate]

Maybe Bain Capital stopped being evil when Romney stopped leading it.

Maybe you and OP should find the quote where someone called Bain "evil"?

Despicable for making Sensata employees train their chinese national replacements?

http://rockrivertimes.com/2012/07/1...-mitt-romney-for-help-in-saving-their-jobs-2/

The Massachusetts-based Sensata Technologies has announced it plans to close the Freeport plant in December and outsource 170 jobs to China. Sensata workers are training their Chinese replacements, who have been flown to Illinois by the company.

Sure but I haven't seen the word evil associated with them in these forums... until today in this thread.

 

[Perknose]

According to Open Secrets, during the present election cycle these Democratic Party candidates took a total of $335,700 from Bain, its lobbyists and employees.

Nothing new here. Big corps regularly hedge their bets by donating to both sides.

The Democratic fundraising advantage, however, was offset by at least $750,000 that Bain Capital employees gave to Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney super-PAC, in 2011.

So, of the two main Presidential candidates, who got the most? From a Republican web site:

To be sure, Romney has garnered more in Bain donations than any other candidate since the beginning of 2007. He has pulled in more than $166,000 during that period, with $84,000 coming in the first nine months of 2011.

Still, Bain execs haven’t ignored President Barack Obama, either, contributing $80,000 to him since the beginning of 2007, with $27,500 coming during the first three quarters of 2011.

 

[blankslate]

Hayabusa you forgot these...

 

[OrByte]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...e_did_at_bain_.html?google_editors_picks=true

This part:

5. Bain reminds everybody how rich Romney is, how different that makes him from ordinary people, and how this kind of advantage perpetuates itself. Five years ago, according to disclosure statements, he was already worth between $190 and $250 million, not counting another $70-100 million in trusts for his children and grandchildren, and not counting real estate worth tens of millions more. It’s not clear how he turned a maximum contribution of $450,000 over 15 years at Bain into an IRA worth between $21 and $102 million (where it grows tax free). Here’s some informed speculation. Once again, the details are mysterious even if his massive exploitation of a tax break meant to encourage middle class people to save more is not.

 

[HomerJS]

If you believe the Democratic Party, Bain Capital is nothing but a bunch of vampire capitalists. They outsource jobs to other countries, close steel mills and take lollypops from little babies.

According to Open Secrets, during the present election cycle these Democratic Party candidates took a total of $335,700 from Bain, its lobbyists and employees. So if the Democrats believe Bain is so evil, why are these candidates taking their money?

Candidate Bain Capital Donations
John Kerry $76,200
Michael F. Bennet $37,000
Mark Warner $32,700
Tim Kaine (Candidate For US Senate in Virginia) $30,000
Claire McCaskill $22,500
Jeanne Shaheen $17,100
Al Franken $15,000
Jack Reed $15,000
Jim Himes $15,000
Sheldon Whitehouse $11,800
Mark Udall $11,300
Nancy Pelosi $10,000
Joe Kennedy III (Candidate For Mass. District 4) $10,000
Richard Blumenthal $9,600
Christopher S. Murphy $7,500
Andrei Cherny (Candidate For Arizona District 9) $7,500
David Cicilline $5,000
Niki Tsongas $2,500
Total $335,700

for the same reason Republicans rail against govt stimulus spending and stand up accepting those big checks. They're called politicans

 

[cubby1223]

No really, I seriously don't understand the point of this thread. Are you saying that because Bain donated to some Democrats that other Democrats who didn't take donations from them aren't allowed to criticize Bain? This is a truly bizarre position to hold.

Bizarre? More like par for the course.

You are correct in the middle sentence, but you cannot deny that the same logic is used countless times on this forum, to insult both parties, and by popular cable news channels and other various political commentators.

As for "the point of this thread", come on, just take two more seconds and you can figure this one out all on your own. I have faith in you!

 

[cubby1223]

Nothing new here. Big corps regularly hedge their bets by donating to both sides.

The Democratic fundraising advantage, however, was offset by at least $750,000 that Bain Capital employees gave to Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney super-PAC, in 2011.

So, of the two main Presidential candidates, who got the most? From a Republican web site:

Ah, so that's why Dems want campaign finance disclosure on GOP donations! Because otherwise one totally could never have figured out Bain Capital supports Romney!

Here's a tip from me to you - don't read random political blogs. I don't. As someone who leans Republican, I never knew of that website before you linked it. The author is clearly reporting on only a part of the full story, something that we see everywhere in political commentary on all sides.

 

[Perknose]

Here's a tip from me to you - don't read random political blogs. I don't. As someone who leans Republican, I never knew of that website before you linked it. The author is clearly reporting on only a part of the full story, something that we see everywhere in political commentary on all sides.

Here's a tip from me to you: Do at least some minimum research before you ladle out advice or you run the risk of embarasing yourself.

Re: the bolded. If you'd bothered to actually read article you'd have seen it wasn't reporting part of a full story in the way my quote made you lazily think. And you'd have seem this prominently displayed at it's end:

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Source Article from http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/bain-capital-donations-romney/2012/01/19/id/424757
Bain Donates More to Democrats Than Republicans
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/bain-capital-donations-romney/2012/01/19/id/424757
http://www.newsmax.com/rss/Politics/1.xml
Newsmax – Politics
Newsmax RSS Feed

It's not a blog piece. Got that?

It's from Newsmax:

Newsmax Media is a conservative American news media organization founded by Christopher W. Ruddy and based in West Palm Beach, Florida. It operates the news website Newsmax.com and publishes Newsmax magazine.

Ruddy started Newsmax.com on September 16, 1998, supported by a group of politically conservative investors, including the family of the late Central Intelligence Agency Director William J. Casey. Later, Richard Mellon Scaife, Ruddy's former employer at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review and a supporter of conservative causes, invested in the fledging company.[1] One of the initial board members was author James Dale Davidson who edited a financial newsletter, Davidson's co-editor, Lord Rees-Mogg, former editor of The Times and Vice Chair of the BBC, later became chairman of Newsmax Media.[2]

Other news figures who later joined the Newsmax board included Arnaud de Borchgrave, the longtime Newsweek chief correspondent who also serves as editor at large of UPI and Jeff Cunningham, former publisher of Forbes. Admiral Thomas Moorer, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Chief of Naval Operations during the Vietnam War, also served as one of the company's founding board members. Former US Secretary of State and Nixon administration Chief of Staff Alexander M. Haig Jr. served as special adviser to NewsMax.[3]

In March 2009, Forbes ran a feature on Newsmax describing it as a "media empire" and the "great right hope" of the Republican Party. Forbes noted that after just a decade of operations it had become a "media powerhouse" - and had surpassed such well known websites as the Drudgereport in web visitors.

According to the magazine, Newsmax draws 3.8 million unique visitors monthly. Political analyst Dick Morris was quoted as saying that Newsmax had become the "most influential Republican-leaning media outlet" in the nation.[7]

In a January 2010 profile on the company, the Financial Times reported that the "Rise of Newsmax Defies the Media Trend" and said its website, Newsmax.com, is "one of the strongest conservative voices online". The paper said Newsmax had witnessed 40 percent growth rates per annum over the past decade and closed 2009 with $35 million revenues, up from $24 million the year before.[8]

You're contention that this is a blog piece incompletely slanted against Republicans looks pretty damn silly now, doesn't it?

 

[Arglebargle]

Our system of institutionalized bribery is second to none!

 

[blackangst1]

Our system of institutionalized bribery is second to none!

A close second to the Philippines whose candidates go door to door and literally pay people for their votes.

 

[kage69]

Our system of institutionalized bribery is second to none!

It sucks, but I wouldn't go that far.

 

[BoomerD]

Our system of institutionalized bribery is second to none!

We have the best politicians money can...and does...buy.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

It sucks, but I wouldn't go that far.

No, it's perfectly balanced to allow plenty of corruption for the devastation of our country to the benefit of a few, but just barely not enough to make citizens really do something about it. It's truly second to none.

 

[Rainsford]

Am I the only one who has yet to hear the "Bain is Evil" line from anyone who isn't a Republican trying to put words into the mouths of Democrats? Clearly many lefties don't really like Bain or think it represents a particularly good brand of capitalism...but evil to the point where not filtering out donations from Bain sources is hypocritical? I'm not really seeing it...

 

[Jhhnn]

It all spends the same, & if you don't take Bain's money, they'll just give it to your opponent.

Bain? Like all truly savvy operators, they hedge their bets so that no matter who wins they will have some appreciation.

If they give you $10K & then spend $100K to beat you by donating to your opponent's cause through anonymous channels, are they really on your side? How can you tell?

It's obvious why rich special interest donors prefer repubs, anyway. They're ideologically inclined to see it your way, and they pretty much stick to pay to play rules. That can't really be said of Dems, whose voter base is different.

 

[sportage]

I'm guessing this is all faux newsed sourced. Their pathetic attempt to distract and deflect from the real issue being that Mitt Romney is in fact the problem, not the solution.
And of that list, only this Mitt Romney turkey is seeking the office of presidency.
But nice try Sean Hannity.

Actually pretty funny.
Like saying to people "drink the kool aid".
After all, nine out of ten of Jim Jones followers prefer it.

 

[Nintendesert]

There's nothing wrong with taking donations from an "evil" company if you use those donations in the pursuit of the common good.

 

[tweaker2]

I swear, I am simultaneously LOL'ing out loud at the Repubs and taken aback at the higher level of hystrionics they're coming out with this campaign season. Limbaugh, FOX and the other fundie AM talk shows is proving that there is no limit to the ridiculous fact-free antics they're capable of.

Instead of capitalizing on all of the good things their legislators are doing up on the Hill, they.......oh wait. Having hardly anything postive to point to, I guess singularly keeping the Dems from getting things done is a good thing...from their point of view. NOW I understand why their propaganda machine is churning out all of that hate, fear and hysteria: It's like getting flushed down the toilet where the closer they get whirlpooled down that deep black hole the more desperately they try to claw their way out of it in sheer panic. And, it looks like they're more than willing to take the rest of the nation down that hole with them.

Logic and reason is lost to the singular purpose of survival, let alone pursuing that arrogantly oft-trumpeted and destructively myopic mission of getting rid of Obama after his first term.

To hell with getting our nation back on its feet. To hell with a recovery that could have had us much further down that road had it not been potholed and cratered with the intransigent blockage and filibustering by the Repubs. Good job.

*Hey, I made a rant! I made a rant!* lol

edit - apologies to the OP for veering off a bit. Bain is typical of all of those other business/special interests that play on both sides of the aisle. It's the way the game is played, isn't it?

 

[Doppel]

Because the country is run by corporations.

 

[boomerang]

<snip>

Great sig. I wonder if anyone besides me noticed it, or maybe I should say, didn't ignore it purposely.

 

[HomerJS]

Am I the only one who has yet to hear the "Bain is Evil" line from anyone who isn't a Republican trying to put words into the mouths of Democrats? Clearly many lefties don't really like Bain or think it represents a particularly good brand of capitalism...but evil to the point where not filtering out donations from Bain sources is hypocritical? I'm not really seeing it...

Just another version of Fox News truth telling

 

[sMiLeYz]

I think OP is wrong but I think he accidentally stumbled upon a nugget of truth.

While most liberals don't like Bain, we don't think it's evil. Anymore than say Goldman Sachs or Google. We clearly see that companies just like giving money to politicians who do their bidding. The politicians NEED the money to win elections whether it's from unions, special interests or corporations.

So no, we don't think Bain Capital is evil... but the whole system of monied interests buying politicians is evil. See the difference?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Great sig. I wonder if anyone besides me noticed it, or maybe I should say, didn't ignore it purposely.

Research it a bit more, and you'll be much less impressed.

 

[kage69]

No, it's perfectly balanced to allow plenty of corruption for the devastation of our country to the benefit of a few, but just barely not enough to make citizens really do something about it. It's truly second to none.

I'm not disputing what it is, what I disagree with is where it ranks compared to the kind of corruption you see in countries like Pakistan, Russia, Mexico, Somalia, North Korea, etc.
There are locations in the world where corruption is part of their culture, not just institutionalized paths of enrichment for politicians.

You want to talk devastation? Let me know when you find an example of an American politician using his position to pad his diet with soda and imported fruit while his countrymen are expiring from malnutrition daily (North Korea)
When you run a country like those generals in Myanmar, you have little need for "balance." Balance costs time and money and in many 3rd countries it is simply unnecessary.

American corruption, while certainly infuriating to the likes of us, is relatively cute and cuddly when you stand it up next to say what others tolerate. I've heard Italy used to be quite bad, India as well.


Edit: From 2010 but... http://www.theatlantic.com/business...corrupt-countries-in-the-world/65222/#slide11 Not surprised at all that Canada and Australia did better than we did. Check out the ghillie suited goat-herder in Equatorial Guinea!, place must be rough!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Am I the only one who has yet to hear the "Bain is Evil" line from anyone who isn't a Republican trying to put words into the mouths of Democrats? Clearly many lefties don't really like Bain or think it represents a particularly good brand of capitalism...but evil to the point where not filtering out donations from Bain sources is hypocritical? I'm not really seeing it...

The hyperbole is understood yet when something rises to a level where it is being used as a weapon as Bain is because it's awful yet money is freely accepted, there is reason to view this as hypocracy. The argument that Bain and the like is unable to influence the dem party is not going to be taken as gospel by infidels such as myself.