not to mention -- are the democrats still holding up FEC appointments so that they can't actually meet to do/decide anything?
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Good political gimmick - even intelligent AT guys don't see he's just using big corporate donors who skirt disclosure requirements and it's all symbolism over substance. General public will eat this up too. Thanks to CPA for showing us the truth.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?ind=K01
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?ind=K01
No surprise at all about the lawyers. Big Law generates a quarter trillion in revenues each year. Have to keep the party and presidential candidate of change from changing anything regarding litigation laws in this country.
Pffft. You guys are just drinking the Kool-Aid. It's all or nothing with campaign reform. There is no starting point allowed. Either complete overhaul or nothing.
Atomic Playboy
Lifer
- Feb 6, 2007
- 16,432
- 1
- 81
Allow me. I'm a liberal, I've always been in favor of removing lobbyist money from the system, and I appreciate what Obama is doing. But as a rational thinker, I realize that there is no way that you are going to remove that money from the political sphere. Whatever changes are enacted, the people with money will find a way to skirt the issue and get their money in, because they know that money talks, and they want the voice. Obama knows this, as does every politician who has argued in favor of campaign finance reform. As important an issue as it is, it is not something I imagine will ever be corrected because money and power go hand-in-hand in our country.
I do appreciate that Barack stuck to his guns, but ultimately, yes, this is a hollow gesture that accomplishes little but making the lobbyists and special interests groups jump through one more small hoop to get their money into the system. In that regard, it is somewhat of a pandering gesture to ivory tower liberals who want to believe that someone can get elected purely on their principles and not for how much money they are able to raise.
I still prefer Obama to Hillary and McCain though.
Exactly. This is just an Orwellian move; more newspeak for his useful idiots.
Seems everyone else has already forgotten McCain Finegold, and 527 organizations.
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Allow me. I'm a liberal, I've always been in favor of removing lobbyist money from the system, and I appreciate what Obama is doing. But as a rational thinker, I realize that there is no way that you are going to remove that money from the political sphere. Whatever changes are enacted, the people with money will find a way to skirt the issue and get their money in, because they know that money talks, and they want the voice. Obama knows this, as does every politician who has argued in favor of campaign finance reform. As important an issue as it is, it is not something I imagine will ever be corrected because money and power go hand-in-hand in our country.
I do appreciate that Barack stuck to his guns, but ultimately, yes, this is a hollow gesture that accomplishes little but making the lobbyists and special interests groups jump through one more small hoop to get their money into the system. In that regard, it is somewhat of a pandering gesture to ivory tower liberals who want to believe that someone can get elected purely on their principles and not for how much money they are able to raise.
I still prefer Obama to Hillary and McCain though.
:thumbsup:
Thank you. I am glad someone came on board with this one to show that not all of us who support Obama are extremists and we do apply the kind of thinking which involves looking at the big picture. Liberal extremists are just as dangerous as conservative extremists. They just happen to use different weapons.
For sure the money will get spent somehow.
I take the most comfort in tidbits like these:
The internet fundraising of Obama's campaign this year is the first time a presidential candidate has been more beholden to the little people than the big donors by the actual dollar percentages. However you feel about that candidate, that's a good trend that I hope sees repetition in future elections.
edit: added bold.
I take the most comfort in tidbits like these:
(source)
The internet fundraising of Obama's campaign this year is the first time a presidential candidate has been more beholden to the little people than the big donors by the actual dollar percentages. However you feel about that candidate, that's a good trend that I hope sees repetition in future elections.
edit: added bold.
Except that takes anyone who gives more than 200$ and uses the "occupation" they list down. As such since I work for university when I donated 500$ to Obama and listed my occupation I am now part of that "corporate" influence. :roll:
Your link is faulty.
New Democratic car cuts gas usage from 20 MPG to 10 MPG.
Dems: Dem car is the leader on fighting pollution!
Repubs: Dem car pollutes 10 MPG, nowhere near perfect, they're misleading, they suck.
The Repubs won't mention how their car is still 20MPG or give any credit to the dems.
What's better, the dems hyping their 10mpg car, or the repubs attacking them for it and offering a 20mpg car?
Dems: Dem car is the leader on fighting pollution!
Repubs: Dem car pollutes 10 MPG, nowhere near perfect, they're misleading, they suck.
The Repubs won't mention how their car is still 20MPG or give any credit to the dems.
What's better, the dems hyping their 10mpg car, or the repubs attacking them for it and offering a 20mpg car?
it seems more like the dems are saying "look, our car that got 20 mpg is now getting 32 kilometers per gallon! what a big improvement!"
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 18K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter