The US Supreme Court
- Thread starter joanne
- Start date
What else would you expect, the democrats are going to need all the help they need in the upcoming election cycles. They were against the repeal solely to guard Hilary Clinton, but now they are really going to need it for their own preservation. It was ok to have the unions, Soros, etc., bankroll the dem communist takeover, so i say let the wars begin!
Gotta love the hypocrisy here. Obama's response was: President Obama was especially un-Presidential yesterday, putting on his new populist facade to call it "a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies" and other "special interests."
Pff, look at the supposed anti lobby prez track record.
Lobbyists on pace for record year
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30882.html
Washington’s influence industry is on track to shatter last year’s record $3.3 billion spent to lobby Congress and the rest of the federal government — and that’s with a down economy and about 1,500 fewer registered lobbyists in town, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Many lobbying firms have escaped the worst of the corporate belt-tightening, thanks, in large part, to the ambitious agenda set out by President Barack Obama — who, ironically, came to Washington with a pledge to break what he considered the undue influence of special-interest lobbyists.
Obama White House Discloses Two More Lobbyist Waivers Granted
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...-white-hou.html
No Lobbyist in the Obama Administration ... Except When There Is One
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/robert-schlesi...ere-is-one.html
Obama appointed more than 17 lobbyists after talking big on anti-lobbyist, clean Governance
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/20471.asp
It is easy to project yourself as a clean politician after making your debut in South Side Chicago with buddies like Rahm Emanuel. US president Obama has appointed more than 17 lobbyists after talking big on anti-lobbyist Governance and rooting corruption out of the American Government.
Would you believe, Obama had to issue 17 waivers on his own rule in less than two weeks for allowing lobbyist enter his Administration and control Governance of America!
delldude
Veteran
More of the evil corporations, Wall Street, etc donating to Washington.
http://www.opensecret.org/
Here’s a list of the top 20 recipients of Wall Street money for the 2010 cycle (2005-2010):
Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) Senate $1,009,650
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) Senate $513,650
Reid, Harry (D-NV) Senate $453,500
Khazei, Alan (D-MA) $288,800
Dodd, Chris (D-CT) Senate $285,408
Bennet, Michael F (D-CO) Senate $247,741
Kirk, Mark (R-IL) House $235,750
Murphy, Scott (D-NY) House $220,100
Specter, Arlen (D-PA) Senate $206,150
Himes, Jim (D-CT) House $197,336
Crist, Charles J Jr (R-FL) $185,900
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) Senate $175,600
Wyden, Ron (D-OR) Senate $173,650
Simmons, Robert R (R-CT) $162,025
Dorgan, Byron L (D-ND) Senate $159,950
Cantor, Eric (R-VA) House $151,650
Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) Senate $151,300
Foley, Thomas C (R-CT) $148,498
White, Bill (D-TX) $145,796
McDonald, Jack (D-TX) $136,600
14 out of the top 20, in fact, carry that troublesome D after their names.
http://www.opensecret.org/
Here’s a list of the top 20 recipients of Wall Street money for the 2010 cycle (2005-2010):
Schumer, Charles E (D-NY) Senate $1,009,650
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) Senate $513,650
Reid, Harry (D-NV) Senate $453,500
Khazei, Alan (D-MA) $288,800
Dodd, Chris (D-CT) Senate $285,408
Bennet, Michael F (D-CO) Senate $247,741
Kirk, Mark (R-IL) House $235,750
Murphy, Scott (D-NY) House $220,100
Specter, Arlen (D-PA) Senate $206,150
Himes, Jim (D-CT) House $197,336
Crist, Charles J Jr (R-FL) $185,900
Lincoln, Blanche (D-AR) Senate $175,600
Wyden, Ron (D-OR) Senate $173,650
Simmons, Robert R (R-CT) $162,025
Dorgan, Byron L (D-ND) Senate $159,950
Cantor, Eric (R-VA) House $151,650
Shelby, Richard C (R-AL) Senate $151,300
Foley, Thomas C (R-CT) $148,498
White, Bill (D-TX) $145,796
McDonald, Jack (D-TX) $136,600
14 out of the top 20, in fact, carry that troublesome D after their names.
The consensus seem that even the big bad evil corporations aren't thrilled with the decision either.
CEOs to Hill: Quit Calling Us for Campaign Cash
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9635062
"Members of Congress already spend too much time raising money from large contributors," the business executives' letter says. "And often, many of us individually are on the receiving end of solicitation phone calls from members of Congress. With additional money flowing into the system due to the court's decision, the fundraising pressure on members of Congress will only increase."
CEOs to Hill: Quit Calling Us for Campaign Cash
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9635062
"Members of Congress already spend too much time raising money from large contributors," the business executives' letter says. "And often, many of us individually are on the receiving end of solicitation phone calls from members of Congress. With additional money flowing into the system due to the court's decision, the fundraising pressure on members of Congress will only increase."
- Thread Starter
- #6
Corporate=$$$$=Republicans=Win Win Win 2012
Big US corperations, with unlimited $$ access to GOP politicians = O U T S O U R C E / I N G.
(a k a ) GOODBYE US Jobs.
Care to share how many folks you know who LOST their Job to OUTSOURCING ?
(Well there's always jobs at Wal-Mart I suppose)
According to recent reports as I mentioned above it looks like its the Dems who are milking the "Big US Corporations". Someday you will get it. Or not.
delldude
Veteran
Outsourcing been going on for quite a while under both flavored parties......So what's your point?
These policies have affected many people causing unBearable times......so who's to blame?
- Thread Starter
- #9
I'm absolutely SURE that YOU know which side will ship jobs OUT of the country faster, Much faster !!!!!
Yes it was the democrats! Clinton supported NAFTA, GATT, the WTO and "free trade" generally, which caused outsourcing to go from a trickle to the current flood. Under Clinton the budget for the federally funded Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) increased by over 30%. OPIC who gives loans and guarantees to companies intended to encourage investment in "developing" countries, which tends to encourage outsourcing. For example, Kimberly Clark transferred 600 jobs to other countries as a result of this funding and Levi Strauss transferred 100 jobs overseas for the same reason.
In other words, the government gives loans to companies, through OPIC, to ship American jobs overseas and Clinton increased OPIC's budget from under $100 million to $3 billion. Under Clinton 14% of OPIC's loans went to Citibank.
Robert Ruben, one of Clinton's Treasury Secretaries, became director of Citibank after leaving office. Under Bush OPIC's budget decreased to $800 million. The problem with outsourcing is not that it "steals American jobs," as nationalists argue, but that it replaces relatively high paying jobs with lower paying jobs, causing the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer. Clinton's policies were even more pro-outsourcing than Bush's.
Bush's policies on the media tend to favor the concentration of the media into a few large corporations. So did Clinton's policies. He signed the 1996 Telecommunications Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which encouraged media monopolization at least as much as Bush.
Garfield1966
Veteran
According tot he same source that Dapoes used, the money is pretty evenly divided among the parties.
Open source
All Contributions (2007-2008)
Grand Total Democrats Republicans Dem % Repub %
Business $1,964,870,224 $1,062,787,601 $896,409,692 54% 46%
Labor $74,773,481 $68,493,069 $6,034,446 92% 8%
Ideological $197,419,547 $126,749,189 $70,109,941 64% 36%
Other $401,280,618 $226,284,343 $173,350,147 56% 43%
Contributions from PACs
Grand Total Democrats Republicans Dem % Repub %
Business $323,668,452 $159,291,636 $164,282,465 49% 51%
Labor $73,132,122 $66,954,390 $5,934,882 92% 8%
Ideological $67,112,600 $36,027,145 $30,896,549 54% 46%
Other $1,070,630 $767,214 $303,416 72% 28%
Contributions from Individuals
Grand Total Democrats Republicans Dem % Repub %
Business $1,637,792,563 $901,248,523 $730,965,460 55% 45%
Labor $1,387,209 $1,295,879 $88,214 93% 6%
Ideological $130,118,578 $90,588,007 $39,159,060 70% 30%
Other $399,894,106 $225,370,641 $172,877,337 56% 43%
Sorry this did not transfer well and I am too tired to set it up correctly. This link goes to show that the disparity that Dapoes would like to be there is actually substantially smaller.
The bottom line is that this time it was the activist republican judges who reversed 100 years of precedent laww and are now making it easier for business to buy a politician. SCOTUS has reinterpreted the 1st amendment to say that the freedoms in the COTUS are not just individual freedoms but that they apply to business as well.
Open source
All Contributions (2007-2008)
Grand Total Democrats Republicans Dem % Repub %
Business $1,964,870,224 $1,062,787,601 $896,409,692 54% 46%
Labor $74,773,481 $68,493,069 $6,034,446 92% 8%
Ideological $197,419,547 $126,749,189 $70,109,941 64% 36%
Other $401,280,618 $226,284,343 $173,350,147 56% 43%
Contributions from PACs
Grand Total Democrats Republicans Dem % Repub %
Business $323,668,452 $159,291,636 $164,282,465 49% 51%
Labor $73,132,122 $66,954,390 $5,934,882 92% 8%
Ideological $67,112,600 $36,027,145 $30,896,549 54% 46%
Other $1,070,630 $767,214 $303,416 72% 28%
Contributions from Individuals
Grand Total Democrats Republicans Dem % Repub %
Business $1,637,792,563 $901,248,523 $730,965,460 55% 45%
Labor $1,387,209 $1,295,879 $88,214 93% 6%
Ideological $130,118,578 $90,588,007 $39,159,060 70% 30%
Other $399,894,106 $225,370,641 $172,877,337 56% 43%
Sorry this did not transfer well and I am too tired to set it up correctly. This link goes to show that the disparity that Dapoes would like to be there is actually substantially smaller.
The bottom line is that this time it was the activist republican judges who reversed 100 years of precedent laww and are now making it easier for business to buy a politician. SCOTUS has reinterpreted the 1st amendment to say that the freedoms in the COTUS are not just individual freedoms but that they apply to business as well.
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
Here's the bottom line.
Free Speech is protected. The inconvenient truth is that in a modern digital age if one has the financial clout to pay for his free speech to be widely distributed matters little.
Free speech is the cornerstone of a free society.
Free Speech is protected. The inconvenient truth is that in a modern digital age if one has the financial clout to pay for his free speech to be widely distributed matters little.
Free speech is the cornerstone of a free society.
- Thread Starter
- #13
So...airbud, if I'm reading you correctly..... because the Wal-Marts of the Country can give "unlimited" funding to their favorite GOP politicians, and as you state "the rich are getting richer/poor getting poorer,........then we know which side to Blame for the eradication of the "Middle Class" .
Yes/No....... ?
Yes/No....... ?
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
Just a small point of order.
"Limosine Liberals" are a well known species whose habitat is normally the Washington DC area.
One would do well to note that money flows to both liberals and conservatives
delldude
Veteran
Looks like Obama is setting the benchmark.
You still all wrapped up in the this side and that side..........you're too naive to realize both sides screwing you for quite some time.....can you Bear it?
Similar threads
