|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 10, 2010 8:13:16 GMT -8
News just broke that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—one of the biggest sources of corporate cash backing Republicans this year—has been using money from foreign corporations in India, Bahrain, and elsewhere to fund its attack ads, in apparent violation of the law.1
This explosive news could shift the course of the election if the Chamber is forced to scale back.
All the right-wing candidates they're helping have to answer for this. The Democrats of America are going to raise hell.
The Chamber knows that. Their strategy is to give no quarter and hope this blows over. In the last week they've actually spent millions more on ads targeted against true progressive American heroes including Russ Feingold and Representative Alan Grayson.
This is an act of WAR!
|
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 12, 2010 7:55:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 12, 2010 13:56:45 GMT -8
News just broke that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—one of the biggest sources of corporate cash backing Republicans this year—has been using money from foreign corporations in India, Bahrain, and elsewhere to fund its attack ads, in apparent violation of the law.1 This explosive news could shift the course of the election if the Chamber is forced to scale back. All the right-wing candidates they're helping have to answer for this. The Democrats of America are going to raise hell. The Chamber knows that. Their strategy is to give no quarter and hope this blows over. In the last week they've actually spent millions more on ads targeted against true progressive American heroes including Russ Feingold and Representative Alan Grayson. This is an act of WAR! It is just a big Democrat lie. When confronted and ask to show evidence, Azelrod just said prove it is not so. What a laugh the desperation of the liberals is turning out to be. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 13, 2010 7:00:39 GMT -8
News just broke that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—one of the biggest sources of corporate cash backing Republicans this year—has been using money from foreign corporations in India, Bahrain, and elsewhere to fund its attack ads, in apparent violation of the law.1 This explosive news could shift the course of the election if the Chamber is forced to scale back. All the right-wing candidates they're helping have to answer for this. The Democrats of America are going to raise hell. The Chamber knows that. Their strategy is to give no quarter and hope this blows over. In the last week they've actually spent millions more on ads targeted against true progressive American heroes including Russ Feingold and Representative Alan Grayson. This is an act of WAR! It is just a big Democrat lie. When confronted and ask to show evidence, Azelrod just said prove it is not so. What a laugh the desperation of the liberals is turning out to be. If I say it is true, it is true. I dare you to prove me to be wrong! |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 13, 2010 11:57:58 GMT -8
It is just a big Democrat lie. When confronted and ask to show evidence, Azelrod just said prove it is not so. What a laugh the desperation of the liberals is turning out to be. If I say it is true, it is true. I dare you to prove me to be wrong! Sorry, Joe, you have about the same "cred" as Azelrod on this.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 13, 2010 20:08:16 GMT -8
If I say it is true, it is true. I dare you to prove me to be wrong! Sorry, Joe, you have about the same "cred" as Azelrod on this. What the Hell is wrong with you? Come on now, have you ever known me to be wrong? (Except for when I wasn't right?) |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 14, 2010 11:09:33 GMT -8
Sorry, Joe, you have about the same "cred" as Azelrod on this. What the Hell is wrong with you? Come on now, have you ever known me to be wrong? (Except for when I wasn't right?) I must admit that those are the only times. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 16, 2010 6:44:06 GMT -8
And your defense is "No we don't, no we don't no we don't." Problem here is that perception means everything. When 80% of voters do not like the Citizens United ruling and 9% of voters would be more likely to support a candidate who takes this kind of money, you have a problem. If the Democrats get this message out effectively (not given at all) Republicans will be hurt. It is very dangerous to give the impression that voters no longer have control over a democratic process and that is just what is happening here. At the very least, all of these organizations, all of them, Republican and Democrat alike should disclose their donors. You don't even agree with Republicans on this one. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 16, 2010 6:51:36 GMT -8
And your defense is "No we don't, no we don't no we don't." Problem here is that perception means everything. When 80% of voters do not like the Citizens United ruling and 9% of voters would be more likely to support a candidate who takes this kind of money, you have a problem. If the Democrats get this message out effectively (not given at all) Republicans will be hurt. It is very dangerous to give the impression that voters no longer have control over a democratic process and that is just what is happening here. At the very least, all of these organizations, all of them, Republican and Democrat alike should disclose their donors. You don't even agree with Republicans on this one. What part of "It is a big lie" do you not understand? Even Azelrod as much as admitted it his inane answer to the qustion about the truth of the matter. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 16, 2010 7:07:22 GMT -8
And your defense is "No we don't, no we don't no we don't." Problem here is that perception means everything. When 80% of voters do not like the Citizens United ruling and 9% of voters would be more likely to support a candidate who takes this kind of money, you have a problem. If the Democrats get this message out effectively (not given at all) Republicans will be hurt. It is very dangerous to give the impression that voters no longer have control over a democratic process and that is just what is happening here. At the very least, all of these organizations, all of them, Republican and Democrat alike should disclose their donors. You don't even agree with Republicans on this one. What part of "It is a big lie" do you not understand? Even Azelrod as much as admitted it his inane answer to the qustion about the truth of the matter. I understand perfectly. I do not believe you. What part of that do you not understand? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 16, 2010 7:58:20 GMT -8
What part of "It is a big lie" do you not understand? Even Azelrod as much as admitted it his inane answer to the qustion about the truth of the matter. I understand perfectly. I do not believe you. What part of that do you not understand? Will the results at the polls in a couple weeks convince you?  |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 16, 2010 13:18:30 GMT -8
I understand perfectly. I do not believe you. What part of that do you not understand? Will the results at the polls in a couple weeks convince you? Polls are irrelevant. I do not believe your claim that these allegations are false-period. The organizations involved in these contributions are hiding something. When Rove goes crazy aggressive, you can be sure that old double chinned fool has been naughty. I have seen the gudgeon who runs the U.S. Chamber of Commerce say he supports outsourcing. I saw that dessicated scrawny "so and so" say it on tape. His interest is foreign and he does nothing for free (in his mind patriotism costs money, you know) and that is perfectly consistent with the foreign contribution allegation. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 16, 2010 15:34:40 GMT -8
I understand perfectly. I do not believe you. What part of that do you not understand? Will the results at the polls in a couple weeks convince you? I know this is a non presidential year election, and the party in power usually loses seats in such an election, but it is hard to see when you realize how much the Republican corruption has totally damaged this country. The Republican destruction of the Middle Class was the most horrific betrayal of the American ideal in world history. The Bastards who were responsible for that should be hunted down and tried for Treason. Then when they are found guilty they should be punished accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 17, 2010 7:29:44 GMT -8
Will the results at the polls in a couple weeks convince you? Polls are irrelevant. I do not believe your claim that these allegations are false-period. The organizations involved in these contributions are hiding something. When Rove goes crazy aggressive, you can be sure that old double chinned fool has been naughty. I have seen the gudgeon who runs the U.S. Chamber of Commerce say he supports outsourcing. I saw that dessicated scrawny "so and so" say it on tape. His interest is foreign and he does nothing for free (in his mind patriotism costs money, you know) and that is perfectly consistent with the foreign contribution allegation. Did you see the exchange that should have convinced you that these allegations are false? Are you one of the last members of the "Flat Earth Society"? |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 17, 2010 7:57:19 GMT -8
Polls are irrelevant. I do not believe your claim that these allegations are false-period. The organizations involved in these contributions are hiding something. When Rove goes crazy aggressive, you can be sure that old double chinned fool has been naughty. I have seen the gudgeon who runs the U.S. Chamber of Commerce say he supports outsourcing. I saw that dessicated scrawny "so and so" say it on tape. His interest is foreign and he does nothing for free (in his mind patriotism costs money, you know) and that is perfectly consistent with the foreign contribution allegation. Did you see the exchange that should have convinced you that these allegations are false? Are you one of the last members of the "Flat Earth Society"? The allegations are true, Win. All you have to know is that the same account the U.S. Chamber of Commerce uses to accept foreign contributions is the one used to pay for their U.S. political ads. Have you ever heard of laws against commingling of funds? Well, this is why they have them. The whole kerfuffle would go away if Rove and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, would disclose. Rove might also gain credibility by having that extra chin of his excised. Don't you want to know who is trying to influence your country's electoral process? The earth is round and carbon dioxide is transparent to light energy and opaque to heat energy. Republicans are not only flat earthers but established science deniers. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 17, 2010 8:04:42 GMT -8
Did you see the exchange that should have convinced you that these allegations are false? Are you one of the last members of the "Flat Earth Society"? The allegations are true, Win. All you have to know is that the same account the U.S. Chamber of Commerce uses to accept foreign contributions is the one used to pay for their U.S. political ads. Have you ever heard of laws against commingling of funds? Well, this is why they have them. The whole kerfuffle would go away if Rove and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, would disclose. Rove might also gain credibility by having that extra chin of his excised. Don't you want to know who is trying to influence your country's electoral process? The earth is round and carbon dioxide is transparent to light energy and opaque to heat energy. Republicans are not only flat earthers but established science deniers. If Axelrod would have said it like that and been able to prove it, you would have a point. He did not and you must question why. It was just a lie thrown out there and Axelrod proved it by his answer. Do you think that the Chamber of Commerce does not understand both the idea that "commingling of funds" and that "money in a pot" is fungible once combined with other funds? Lawyers and Accountants become rich manipulating those ideas. |
|
|
|
Post by sandiegopete on Oct 17, 2010 14:19:28 GMT -8
There is a lot of discussion about the US Chamber of Commerce using money from foreign sources to fund political advertisements. The fact is, under the Citizens United v. FEC decision the Supreme Court found that corporations domiciled in the United States, regardless of ownership, are entitled to fund political advertisements in the United States. Remember, Federal laws regarding foreign nationals only apply to those corporations domiciled in countries other than the United States. So, a corporation such as Citgo which is domiciled in Texas and is 100% owned by a holding company which itself is 100% owned by a company 100% owned by the government of Venezuela is a corporation entitled to purchase advertising supporting specific political candidates in the United States. The contributors to the US Chamber are legally permitted to be held secret by the Chamber. There is no way to legally expose those secret contributors and the Chamber has no obligation to do so. However, some have publicly confessed their contributions. The News Corporation is one. A corporation is owned by its shareholders. The second largest shareholder of News Corporation is Saudi Arabian Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal who is not a citizen of the United States. The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United permits foreign nationals to contribute to United States Political campaigns through the United States corporations that they own. There is nothing illegal about the actions of the US Chamber, indeed its actions comply with the spirit of the majority of the justices on the United States Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 17, 2010 14:43:00 GMT -8
There is a lot of discussion about the US Chamber of Commerce using money from foreign sources to fund political advertisements. The fact is, under the Citizens United v. FEC decision the Supreme Court found that corporations domiciled in the United States, regardless of ownership, are entitled to fund political advertisements in the United States. Remember, Federal laws regarding foreign nationals only apply to those corporations domiciled in countries other than the United States. So, a corporation such as Citgo which is domiciled in Texas and is 100% owned by a holding company which itself is 100% owned by a company 100% owned by the government of Venezuela is a corporation entitled to purchase advertising supporting specific political candidates in the United States. The contributors to the US Chamber are legally permitted to be held secret by the Chamber. There is no way to legally expose those secret contributors and the Chamber has no obligation to do so. However, some have publicly confessed their contributions. The News Corporation is one. A corporation is owned by its shareholders. The second largest shareholder of News Corporation is Saudi Arabian Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal who is not a citizen of the United States. The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United permits foreign nationals to contribute to United States Political campaigns through the United States corporations that they own. There is nothing illegal about the actions of the US Chamber, indeed its actions comply with the spirit of the majority of the justices on the United States Supreme Court. Great first post! |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 17, 2010 17:56:25 GMT -8
There is a lot of discussion about the US Chamber of Commerce using money from foreign sources to fund political advertisements. The fact is, under the Citizens United v. FEC decision the Supreme Court found that corporations domiciled in the United States, regardless of ownership, are entitled to fund political advertisements in the United States. Remember, Federal laws regarding foreign nationals only apply to those corporations domiciled in countries other than the United States. So, a corporation such as Citgo which is domiciled in Texas and is 100% owned by a holding company which itself is 100% owned by a company 100% owned by the government of Venezuela is a corporation entitled to purchase advertising supporting specific political candidates in the United States. The contributors to the US Chamber are legally permitted to be held secret by the Chamber. There is no way to legally expose those secret contributors and the Chamber has no obligation to do so. However, some have publicly confessed their contributions. The News Corporation is one. A corporation is owned by its shareholders. The second largest shareholder of News Corporation is Saudi Arabian Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal who is not a citizen of the United States. The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United permits foreign nationals to contribute to United States Political campaigns through the United States corporations that they own. There is nothing illegal about the actions of the US Chamber, indeed its actions comply with the spirit of the majority of the justices on the United States Supreme Court. But, legality is not the issue. Republicans defensiveness has nothing to do with whether Citizens United is legal. You don't get it at all do you? It is the perception of foreign influence. Americans, Republican, Democrat and Independent don't like the concept. The polls that indicate most Americans disagree not only with the Supreme Court decision, but also believe that foreign influence in our elections is an anathema. The issue would have no legs and the Republicans would not be defensive if all of this were a non issue. It is a fact that the polls say 9% of voters would vote for candidates using these contributions as the decision fulcrum. The voters think this stinks. Legal has nothing to do with it. The fact the the Supreme Court made a ruling that anyone with a 100 I.Q. can see is stupid reflects poorly on them, not us. (A suggestion. Break up your text a bit. Breaking it up makes it easier to read on a small screen.) |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 17, 2010 19:06:07 GMT -8
There is a lot of discussion about the US Chamber of Commerce using money from foreign sources to fund political advertisements. The fact is, under the Citizens United v. FEC decision the Supreme Court found that corporations domiciled in the United States, regardless of ownership, are entitled to fund political advertisements in the United States. Remember, Federal laws regarding foreign nationals only apply to those corporations domiciled in countries other than the United States. So, a corporation such as Citgo which is domiciled in Texas and is 100% owned by a holding company which itself is 100% owned by a company 100% owned by the government of Venezuela is a corporation entitled to purchase advertising supporting specific political candidates in the United States. The contributors to the US Chamber are legally permitted to be held secret by the Chamber. There is no way to legally expose those secret contributors and the Chamber has no obligation to do so. However, some have publicly confessed their contributions. The News Corporation is one. A corporation is owned by its shareholders. The second largest shareholder of News Corporation is Saudi Arabian Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal who is not a citizen of the United States. The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United permits foreign nationals to contribute to United States Political campaigns through the United States corporations that they own. There is nothing illegal about the actions of the US Chamber, indeed its actions comply with the spirit of the majority of the justices on the United States Supreme Court. But, legality is not the issue. Republicans defensiveness has nothing to do with whether Citizens United is legal. You don't get it at all do you? It is the perception of foreign influence. Americans, Republican, Democrat and Independent don't like the concept. The polls that indicate most Americans disagree not only with the Supreme Court decision, but also believe that foreign influence in our elections is an anathema. The issue would have no legs and the Republicans would not be defensive if all of this were a non issue. It is a fact that the polls say 9% of voters would vote for candidates using these contributions as the decision fulcrum. The voters think this stinks. Legal has nothing to do with it. The fact the the Supreme Court made a ruling that anyone with a 100 I.Q. can see is stupid reflects poorly on them, not us. (A suggestion. Break up your text a bit. Breaking it up makes it easier to read on a small screen.) He is telling you the law and not arguing the issue. Since the Chamber does not need to disclose its donor list, how do you know (not guess) anything? |
|
More "Big Lie" politics....
