What a wonderful collage showing the hypocrisy of the FOX “News” talent. Humorous, to boot. Another win, Mr. Stewart.

Was Stewart alluding to the SOROS $$$$$ that funded the Radical-Left group posting the “foreign money influence” CANARD?

Is SOROS Buying American Elections? – or is the Democratic Media still propagandizing the news to effect that end?

11-02-10 —– Send a message to the community-organizer agitant in the White House – America isn’t the Banana Republic he’d like to turn it into!

NORBIT said:
Was Stewart alluding to the SOROS $$$$$ that funded the Radical-Left group posting the “foreign money influence” CANARD? Is SOROS Buying American Elections? – or is the Democratic Media still propagandizing the news to effect that end? 11-02-10 —– Send a message to the community-organizer agitant in the White House – America isn’t the Banana Republic he’d like to turn it into!

Stop diverting from the fact that the Chinese are now parties in our elections, thanks to your little buddy Turd Blossom. If that doesn’t bother you, then you are no American. See if you can rent a room with Sara N. Italy and whine from there.

“One could reasonably surmise that News Corp. money that went to the Chamber of Commerce, and perhaps the $1 Million donation Republican Governor’s Association, came from bin Talal.”

Just as

One could reasonably surmise that the 25M$ that went to GE from the Obama Stimulus package was pay (it back or forward) for the television personalities on NBC/MSNBC complete Obama suckupery.

But, hey….that’s another story for another board, since it doesn’t appear to be of interest here.

As for Jon….yawn. He needs to get new material.

Team Obama got a gazzillion dollars from unnamed sources, there was lots of investigation/discussion about that money coming from foreign sources….indeed, one could reasonably surmise that a large portion of the dollars that went to Obama came from people like George Soros, Achmadinajad, Castro, Chavez, etc.

The Real Royal King said:
Stop diverting from the fact that the Chinese are now parties in our elections, thanks to your little buddy Turd Blossom. If that doesn’t bother you, then you are no American. See if you can rent a room with Sara N. Italy and whine from there.

Thanks to Turd Blossom?? Have you forgotten AlGore’s little dalliance with the Chinese?

IDIOT!!

The Real Royal King said:
Stop diverting from the fact that the Chinese are now parties in our elections, thanks to your little buddy Turd Blossom. If that doesn’t bother you, then you are no American. See if you can rent a room with Sara N. Italy and whine from there.

The Chinese became part of our electoral process when Bill Clinton sold out our nuclear technology to them for a cool $25 million – funnelled through the San Fransisco “monks”!

btw, It was also under Clinton that all the Wall Street regulations were GUTTED!!!

You remember Cinton, he was our first black president! – until Obama’s camp declared him (all together now, the Democrats favorite SMEAR) A RACIST!!!

Jon Stewart towing the Liberal line?

SHOCKER!!11!!!!

Where do Obama and Gibbs get off talking about undisclosed donor funds?

Kind of hypocritical of Obama to be pushing this, considering he refused to release his under $200 donor list, which equaled almost half of one billion dollars.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/those-undisclos.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/171015/obamas-funny-money-or-whos-loving-you-barry/andy-mccarthy
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/us/politics/10donate.html?fta=y

The White House plans to continue attacking groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative organizations for not disclosing the names of donors behind political ads. But during the 2004 Democratic primary campaign, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was involved with a political advocacy group that refused to reveal its own donors until the law required it.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/12/spirit-of-political-disclosure-white-house-press-sec-once-part-of-group-that-refused-to-disclose-donors/#ixzz12Ey7eUBS

So are both sides guilty of this behavior? Or only one? And what’s the solution? Do we need to call for across the board transparency, or just accept that this is the way the political world works these days and deal with it? People can’t have it both ways. You can’t say it’s OK for one side to do it but not the other. You can’t call for transparency from one side but then say that the other can hide whatever it wants. It seems like a lot of selective outrage, again.

Implying guilt without real evidence? Who would do such a thing, repeatedly, for years on end?

The Real Royal King said:
What a wonderful collage showing the hypocrisy of the FOX “News” talent. Humorous, to boot. Another win, Mr. Stewart.

Not really, because the exposes the hypocrisy of Stewart and the left. Let me know when Stewart gives a damn about GE, The white house, the DNC and all the donations that come from the media to the Democrat party.

Dan….calling Dan…..how about instructing your columnists to provide us some balance.

There are stories galore about how Team Obama accepting foreign money and refused to identify donors…..why the silence on that TOPIC? Why are you allowing your columnists to put forth only ONE side of a story. That is not in keeping with your mission or are you working for/with Griffin and just pushing the DNC talking points????.

There are stories galore about how Jake Tapper called the President and his team “whackjobs” for not releasing information about his long form birth certificate or his undergrad college records, especially in regards to team Obama criticizing others for not being transparent. Where are you Dan? How do you justify this imbalance?

And SILENCE on the $45M contribution to GE, parent company of NBC, yet lots of stories about FNC and it’s monetary contributions?

I really like this board, it has potential…..but ya gotta give us something here other than one-sided DNC talking points.

NORBIT said:
Was Stewart alluding to the SOROS $$$$$ that funded the Radical-Left group posting the “foreign money influence” CANARD?

Is SOROS Buying American Elections? – or is the Democratic Media still propagandizing the news to effect that end?

11-02-10 —– Send a message to the community-organizer agitant in the White House – America isn’t the Banana Republic he’d like to turn it into!

Soros a) has been an American citizen for 40 years; and b) not the only billionaire in the world, believe it or not.

Why are Obama and his lapdogs so upset about the idea of foreign money being injected into U.S. politics? After all, this is the president who declared himself a citizen of the world and made the following statements in his infamous Berlin speech:

“The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down.”

“People of the world – look at Berlin, where a wall came down, a continent came together, and history proved that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.”

“While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history.”

I guess he’s only for foreign intervention in U.S. affairs when it favors Democrats. Speaking of which, isn’t Obama like the greatest world leader in the history of the world, who people of all nations support wholeheartedly? So, how can there be any foreigners who would ever contribute to the evil Republicans? It’s such an absurd argument when you break it down.

TfT said:
“One could reasonably surmise that News Corp. money that went to the Chamber of Commerce, and perhaps the $1 Million donation Republican Governor’s Association, came from bin Talal.”

Just as

One could reasonably surmise that the 25M$ that went to GE from the Obama Stimulus package was pay (it back or forward) for the television personalities on NBC/MSNBC complete Obama suckupery.

But, hey….that’s another story for another board, since it doesn’t appear to be of interest here.

As for Jon….yawn. He needs to get new material.

Team Obama got a gazzillion dollars from unnamed sources, there was lots of investigation/discussion about that money coming from foreign sources….indeed, one could reasonably surmise that a large portion of the dollars that went to Obama came from people like George Soros, Achmadinajad, Castro, Chavez, etc.

Likely surmise? Based on what? The Chamber of Commerce is taking money from foreign sources and actively manipulating elections with a bigger warchest than it has EVER had.

If the Chamber were spending their warchest on negative ads against Republicans, would you dismiss it so easily? Do you care about a foreign hand in legislation as long as it’s on the side you favor? So all that legislation to stop off-shoring that the Chamber is lobbying so hard against with money from China, India, Saudi Arabia, etc., you’re fine with that?

whytee said:

If the Chamber were spending their warchest on negative ads against Republicans, would you dismiss it so easily? Do you care about a foreign hand in legislation as long as it’s on the side you favor? So all that legislation to stop off-shoring that the Chamber is lobbying so hard against with money from China, India, Saudi Arabia, etc., you’re fine with that?

Of course he would care if the ads were against Republicans. Nothing but partisan, selective outrage.

…But during the 2004 Democratic primary campaign, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was involved with a political advocacy group that refused to reveal its own donors until the law required it…

During the 2003-2004 presidential primary season, however, Gibbs worked as the spokesman for a liberal advocacy group that ran attack ads against then-Democratic candidate Howard Dean. The “secretive” group, called Americans for Jobs, Health Care & Progressive Values, spent months organizing scathing ads without disclosing who was paying for them.

One particularly damaging TV spot that aired in December 2003 showed a photograph of Osama Bin Laden while an ominous voice declared, “Americans want a president that can face the dangers ahead. But Howard Dean has no military or foreign policy experience. And Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy. It’s time for Democrats to think about that. And think about it now.” The ad, part of a series of anti-Dean spots, crippled the Dean campaign.

The Dean camp was furious, and called on the group to disclose who had funded the ad.

“Whoever is behind this should crawl out from underneath their rock and have the courage to say who they are,” Former Dean Spokesman Tricia Enright told The New York Times at the time. “It is hateful, it’s cynical, it’s exactly the kind of ad that keeps people from voting, that keeps people from getting involved in the process.”

The organization’s Treasurer, David Jones, refused.

“We will disclose donors when the law requires,” Jones was quoted as saying in The New York Times….

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/12/spirit-of-political-disclosure-white-house-press-sec-once-part-of-group-that-refused-to-disclose-donors/#ixzz12FHHu6lA

NORBIT said:

btw, It was also under Clinton that all the Wall Street regulations were GUTTED!!!

… you mean when Bill Clinton signed legislation crafted by future foreign bank director Phil Gramm and the Republican-controlled congress? Clinton signed the legislation to be sure, but it was the Republicans as a block during a 12-year period of control of Congress that gutted Wall St. regulations. And a lot of them, like Gramm, were richly rewarded for selling out the US economy.

Also, don’t forget the back-room meeting by Bush, Paulson and the heads of Goldman Sachs and other big banks to further gut regulations, which played a huge role as well. And Bush shut down the attorneys general trying to stop the predatory lending that fed the Wall St. mortgage-backed securities bubble that crashed the economy, so don’t leave that one out while you’re handing out blame.

Azarkhan said:
…But during the 2004 Democratic primary campaign, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was involved with a political advocacy group that refused to reveal its own donors until the law required it…

During the 2003-2004 presidential primary season, however, Gibbs worked as the spokesman for a liberal advocacy group that ran attack ads against then-Democratic candidate Howard Dean. The “secretive” group, called Americans for Jobs, Health Care & Progressive Values, spent months organizing scathing ads without disclosing who was paying for them.

One particularly damaging TV spot that aired in December 2003 showed a photograph of Osama Bin Laden while an ominous voice declared, “Americans want a president that can face the dangers ahead. But Howard Dean has no military or foreign policy experience. And Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy. It’s time for Democrats to think about that. And think about it now.” The ad, part of a series of anti-Dean spots, crippled the Dean campaign.

The Dean camp was furious, and called on the group to disclose who had funded the ad.

“Whoever is behind this should crawl out from underneath their rock and have the courage to say who they are,” Former Dean Spokesman Tricia Enright told The New York Times at the time. “It is hateful, it’s cynical, it’s exactly the kind of ad that keeps people from voting, that keeps people from getting involved in the process.”

The organization’s Treasurer, David Jones, refused.

“We will disclose donors when the law requires,” Jones was quoted as saying in The New York Times….

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/12/spirit-of-political-disclosure-white-house-press-sec-once-part-of-group-that-refused-to-disclose-donors/#ixzz12FHHu6lA

So isn’t it safe to say that both sides play this game?

sarainitaly said:
Where do Obama and Gibbs get off talking about undisclosed donor funds?

Kind of hypocritical of Obama to be pushing this, considering he refused to release his under $200 donor list, which equaled almost half of one billion dollars.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/those-undisclos.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/171015/obamas-funny-money-or-whos-loving-you-barry/andy-mccarthy
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/us/politics/10donate.html?fta=y

The White House plans to continue attacking groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative organizations for not disclosing the names of donors behind political ads. But during the 2004 Democratic primary campaign, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was involved with a political advocacy group that refused to reveal its own donors until the law required it.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/12/spirit-of-political-disclosure-white-house-press-sec-once-part-of-group-that-refused-to-disclose-donors/#ixzz12Ey7eUBS

You’re forgetting the quid pro quo element. Even if the right’s persistent accusations against the President are true — (and I’d love to see the evidence) — you’re talking about under $200. This is millions of dollars directly from foreign sources with NO disclosure.

Dronetek said:
Not really, because the exposes the hypocrisy of Stewart and the left. Let me know when Stewart gives a damn about GE, The white house, the DNC and all the donations that come from the media to the Democrat party.

The issue is transparency. Citizens United opened up a whole world of anonymous corporate manipulation of elections. The fact that big business monopolies are throwing millions in favor of Republican candidates should tell you something. Big business doesn’t give a damn about the US economy. They have off-shore corporate headquarters, off-shore tax shelters; they don’t even care about US consumers anymore because they see China and India as their future consumers.

Hey, Jon, you dumb FK, prove it or STFU!

Latin2 said:
Jon Stewart towing the Liberal line?

SHOCKER!!11!!!!

but he is right which is what is upsetting you

paulmdoro said:
So isn’t it safe to say that both sides play this game?

You might want to let Pres Obama and Robert Gibbs know that. Oh, and tell them to tone down the hypocrisy. It’s unbecoming for a President.

whytee said:
Citizens United opened up a whole world of anonymous corporate manipulation of elections

From Bonnie Erbe, an extreme conservative:

7/21/2008-Barack Obama’s Fundraising Hypocrisy—a Lobbyist by Any Other Name…

…But consider whence much of Obama’s money comes. While donations to his campaign are not accepted from lobbyists per se, they are proffered by corporate executives. These same executives face a mountain of federal issues on which they will most surely need Obama’s help, should he win the White House in November. So what’s the difference?

To wit. Bloomberg reported that donors to Obama’s joint fundraising committee included Jay Grinney, president and chief executive officer of Birmingham, Ala.-based HealthSouth Corp., who gave $10,000, and Donald Thompson, U.S. chief of Oak Brook, Ill.-based McDonald’s Corp., who gave $28,500, the maximum.

As I’ve noted before, Sen. Obama’s fourth-largest corporate donor is Exelon, the nation’s largest provider of nuclear power.

…But did he accept largesse in the amount of more than a quarter million dollars from Exelon’s CEO and top executives? Yes. In the process, he watered down to oblivion an antinuclear amendment he had sponsored, originally to force nuclear power producers to report even the most negligible of radioactive leaks. He then went on to tell mesmerized campaign audiences he had “passed” his antinuclear bill, which never passed the U.S. Senate….

http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/erbe/2008/07/21/barack-obamas-fundraising-hypocrisy–a-lobbyist-by-any-other-name

bigbrainbrad said:
but he is right which is what is upsetting you

Right about what?

Prove that Repubs are using foreign money for the ads.

You can’t and the pitiful snail trail Barry can’t either.

notsofast said:
Hey, Jon, you dumb FK, prove it or STFU!

i think he did prove it or didn’t you watch

Hall: “Could this be the reason why a number Fox News’ on-air talent expressed outrage over any inquiry into the source of dollars going towards the US Chamber of Commerce? Or is it because the traditionally right-of-center opiniotainment programming on Fox News typically defends the GOP?”

Or maybe they expressed outrage because THERE’S NO F’IN EVIDENCE SHOWING FORIEGN DOLLARS GOING TO CHAMBER ADS

bigbrainbrad said:
i think he did prove it or didn’t you watch

I repeat: Show where he proved the Repubs used foreign money for the ads.

I guess you can’t read English yet.

Azarkhan said:
You might want to let Pres Obama and Robert Gibbs know that. Oh, and tell them to tone down the hypocrisy. It’s unbecoming for a President.

Spare your pseudo-indignation. You could care less. In your world one side is guilty of wrongdoing and hypocrisy while the other is not.

sarainitaly said:
Where do Obama and Gibbs get off talking about undisclosed donor funds? Kind of hypocritical of Obama to be pushing this, considering he refused to release his under $200 donor list, which equaled almost half of one billion dollars. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/those-undisclos.htmlhttp://www.nationalreview.com/corner/171015/obamas-funny-money-or-whos-loving-you-barry/andy-mccarthyhttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/us/politics/10donate.html?fta=y The White House plans to continue attacking groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative organizations for not disclosing the names of donors behind political ads. But during the 2004 Democratic primary campaign, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was involved with a political advocacy group that refused to reveal its own donors until the law required it. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/12/spirit-of-political-disclosure-white-house-press-sec-once-part-of-group-that-refused-to-disclose-donors/#ixzz12Ey7eUBS

Why don’t you just butt out of American elections, Sara N. Italy. I don’t go to Italy and make suggestions about how they should conduct elections. I find your interjection into this matter patently offensive.

notsofast said:
I repeat: Show where he proved the Repubs used foreign money for the ads. I guess you can’t read English yet.

You didn’t watch, did you Nutso. well, ignorance has never stopped you from shoveling more Krap on the Krap Wagon and pushing it around.

The Real Royal King said:
You didn’t watch, did you Nutso. well, ignorance has never stopped you from shoveling more Krap on the Krap Wagon and pushing it around.

In other words: “You are right,. There was absolutely nothing in this piece that showed any foreign money was used by the Chamber of Commerce.”

You are so fking easy!

The Real Royal King said:
Why don’t you just butt out of American elections, Sara N. Italy. I don’t go to Italy and make suggestions about how they should conduct elections. I find your interjection into this matter patently offensive.

Hey, King, they are removing those miners today, so that they can put your pathetic libby ass down into that mine and seal it.

paulmdoro said:
Spare your pseudo-indignation

Now that is a good message to relay to Pres Obama when you meet to discuss his hypocrisy and lies regarding the Chamber of Commerce.

sarainitaly said:
Where do Obama and Gibbs get off talking about undisclosed donor funds? Kind of hypocritical of Obama to be pushing this, considering he refused to release his under $200 donor list, which equaled almost half of one billion dollars.

Sara (who loves America so much she lives in a foreign country where she benefits from government healthcare) loves to mislead. Only about 26% of the $452 Million President Obama raised in ’08 came from small donors. The rest came from those contributing over $200 and were fully disclosed.

http://www.cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/08-11-24/Realty_Check_-_Obama_Small_Donors.aspx

Sara (who loves America so much she lives in a foreign country where she benefits from government healthcare) also loves false equivalencies comparing large corporations and billionaires who are namelessly funnelling ten of millions to influence American elections to middle class people who donated less than $200 who’s names are rightfully protected so that their employers & others cannot retaliate against them.

Did anyone in the Washington press corpse ask Bagdhad Bob Gibbs to cite?

I am a devout progressive liberal Democrat, but I CAN NOT let the President get away with what he is doing.

Obama says that the Republicans are using money given to them by “foreign sources” to run ads and manipulate the American people and the political process. They want the Republicans to show proof that they aren’t guilty of this.

Isn’t this the same “prove you are innocent” scenario that Obama railed against when he was asked to produce his birth certificate?  This is the height of hypocrisy and it is insulting to everyone’s intellegence.  Does the administration not realize that EVERYONE sees through the lies and diversionary tactics? Shame on you, Mr. President.

JamesA1102 said:
Sara (who loves America so much she lives in a foreign country where she benefits from government healthcare)

Ahhhhhhhhh, another lib xenophobe. How quaint!

whytee said:
You’re forgetting the quid pro quo element. Even if the right’s persistent accusations against the President are true — (and I’d love to see the evidence) — you’re talking about under $200. This is millions of dollars directly from foreign sources with NO disclosure.

NO, I’m talking about half a BILLION dollars, and a lot of it did come from foreign sources, with no disclosure. I suggest you read the links I included.

sarainitaly said:
NO, I’m talking about half a BILLION dollars, and a lot of it did come from foreign sources, with no disclosure. I suggest you read the links I included.

I’m not too fond of foreigners constantly bashing our President, either. Whether the president be W or President Obama, or anyone else. Well, maybe Raygun, but we all have our faults. Why not concentrate on Italian politics? There is plenty there.

JamesA1102 said:
Sara (who loves America so much she lives in a foreign country where she benefits from government healthcare) loves to mislead. Only about 26% of the $452 Million President Obama raised in ‘08 came from small donors. The rest came from those contributing over $200 and were fully disclosed.

http://www.cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/08-11-24/Realty_Check_-_Obama_Small_Donors.aspx

Sara (who loves America so much she lives in a foreign country where she benefits from government healthcare) also loves false equivalencies comparing large corporations and billionaires who are namelessly funnelling ten of millions to influence American elections to middle class people who donated less than $200 who’s names are rightfully protected so that their employers & others cannot retaliate against them.

Although an unusually high percentage (49%) of Obama’s funds came in discrete contributions of $200 or less (see Table 3), only 26% of his money through August 31 (and 24% of his funds through October 15, according to the most recent FEC reports) came from donors whose total contributions aggregated to $200 or less.

Obama did not disclose his donor list – 49% that came from contributions of $200 or less.

“Thus, a president and the party who campaigned on hope and change ceases on an unsupported claim that originated on a left-wing website to raise dark questions about secret and foreign influence in the election. And never mind that a still undetermined amount of cash flowed in to the Obama’s campaign two years ago from donors who used prepaid credit cards and other devices that hid their actual identities.

And back at the time, there was one woman who was down on the campaign finance list as having given almost $175,000 to the Obama campaign,” Hume replied. “She was well out in Missouri. She got a telephone call from The Washington Post to ask her about it. She said she hadn’t given any money. That scores of other contributors, we still don’t know who they are, had given that money in her name.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2010/10/12/hume-asks-about-undisclosed-08-obama-donors-wake-whs-chamber-witch-hunt

notsofast said:
In other words: “You are right,. There was absolutely nothing in this piece that showed any foreign money was used by the Chamber of Commerce.” You are so fking easy!

Don’t get in my face about this. You’re the one who thinks Chinese money influencing American elections is proper. I’m being the patriot here.

whytee said:
… you mean when Bill Clinton signed legislation crafted by future foreign bank director Phil Gramm and the Republican-controlled congress? Clinton signed the legislation to be sure, but it was the Republicans as a block during a 12-year period of control of Congress that gutted Wall St. regulations. And a lot of them, like Gramm, were richly rewarded for selling out the US economy. Also, don’t forget the back-room meeting by Bush, Paulson and the heads of Goldman Sachs and other big banks to further gut regulations, which played a huge role as well. And Bush shut down the attorneys general trying to stop the predatory lending that fed the Wall St. mortgage-backed securities bubble that crashed the economy, so don’t leave that one out while you’re handing out blame.

I agree! – It’s the Wall Street – Government Axis of Evil that has perverted this capitalist system.

Now, let’s hear that left-wing condemnation of Barney Frank, who enabled the sub-prime disaster by giving out free taxpayer monies through the government sieves known as Fannie & Freddie! – after being explicitly warned numerous times – ON TAPE! – that this debacle would occur!

How many of those bundled derivatives would have been sold to investors had Barney not put the US government’s AAA imprimatur on them??

sarainitaly said:
Although an unusually high percentage (49%) of Obama’s funds came in discrete contributions of $200 or less (see Table 3), only 26% of his money through August 31 (and 24% of his funds through October 15, according to the most recent FEC reports) came from donors whose total contributions aggregated to $200 or less. Obama did not disclose his donor list – 49% that came from contributions of $200 or less. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2010/10/12/hume-asks-about-undisclosed-08-obama-donors-wake-whs-chamber-witch-hunt

Newsbusters! All the Marys in Heaven, you and Michelle-in-Utah, a/k/a Soccermom, a/k/a Inebriatedtruther have such a library of discredited sources!

JamesA1102 said:
Only about 26% of the $452 Million President Obama raised in ‘08 came from small donors.

JamesA1102 (who loves Obama so much he is willing to lie for him) is wrong. Here is the real number:

President-elect Barack Obama raised a record-breaking $745 million throughout his presidential campaign, the Federal Election Committee reported Thursday.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2008/reportersblog/2008/12/obama_campaign_fundraising_tot.html

The Real Royal King said:
Newsbusters! All the Marys in Heaven, you and Michelle-in-Utah, a/k/a Soccermom, a/k/a Inebriatedtruther have such a library of discredited sources!

Is PBS a discredited source?

Its just another example of Stewart and the rest of the MSM acting and the DNC’s personal attack dogs. This is a completely baseless claim, but that doesn’t stop Stewart from being a good useful idiot.

Azarkhan said:
Is PBS a discredited source?

Big time. Its only made worse by the fact they get public funds.

Dronetek said:
Big time.

But not to leftists.

Azarkhan said:
Is PBS a discredited source?

I was responding to Sara N. Italy’s disreputable and discredited source, Dimwit.

I have no doubt your amount is correct. PBS is almost always correct. But, so what? President Obama was an effective fund-raiser. We knew that. PBS knows that. What point are you trying to make?

OBAMA GOT MONEY FROM CHINA IN 2008

By Woodrow Wilcox

Obama and his allies have suggested that some of the money spent on campaign ads by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce might be coming from foreign sources.

But, in 2008, Obama’s campaign was getting some money from sources inside China .

A video report about “An ACORN China Obama Connection” is on YOUTUBE (www.youtube.com, search “an acorn china obama connection”). Here is a direct link to the video clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBNCpE5-2lU

Cy Huerter, a retired U.S. Naval Officer from northwest Indiana was interviewed in the video clip. In the video clip, Cy Huerter explains how an American business owner from China traveled to the U.S. to pass out “VOTE FOR OBAMA” tickets at an election polling site in Gary , Indiana .

The American business owner from China is identified in the video by display of the business card that he gave to Cy Huerter. The business owner said that he was an attorney who used to work for A.C.O.R.N., the group that supported Obama and with which Obama worked in the past.

“If a businessman makes money in China and then comes to the U.S. to campaign for Obama, you know he is bringing money with him from China even if it is just for his living and travel expenses while here in the U.S. ,” Huerter stated. “Using his China based credit cards and China based bank account, he could have easily brought more money from China to the U.S. to help the Obama campaign. If his business does deals with the government in China , then the ultimate source of the funds is the Chinese government. How many other foreign government connected people were helping Obama?” Huerter asked.

# 30 #

Note: News media can contact Cy Huerter for additional interviews at 219-838-3165.

Written on October 11, 2010 by

Woodrow Wilcox

Wilcox News Media

The Real Royal King said: Dimwit.

Now King, there you go with the namecalling again. Tsk, tsk. I’m afraid I’m going to have to report you to Alamo2 and PaulmDoro. They hate namecalling.

The Real Royal King said:

PBS is almost always correct.

How do you know this? What watchdog do you read that keeps tabs on PBS?

What is amazing about most of the ‘defense of the Republicans’ post is that they are “two wrongs make a right” arguments, i.e. “The Democrats do it too, nayh nayh, your mother swims after troop ships.”

Wouldn’t it be better that we acknowledge the problem and crack down on campaign financing, both on the left and the right?

Marla

Marla Louise said:
Wouldn’t it be better that we acknowledge the problem and crack down on campaign financing

It sure would. But unfortunately the Supreme Court has ruled that campaign financing is protected by the First Amendment. BTW, no need to rehash Citizens United. Let’s go right to Buckley v. Valeo, 1976.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo

Someone should hold a rally so that people like Jon Stewart take the rhetoric down a notch. Something like a sanity rally or something. He’s certainly not being very moderate.

gordonbloyershow said:
American business owner from China traveled to the U.S. to pass out “VOTE FOR OBAMA” tickets at an election polling site in Gary , Indiana .bringing money with him from China even if it is just for his living and travel expenses while here in the U.S

wow
scathing

I see mr wilcox and you share a tailor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrEcVqpdc2Y

paulmdoro said:
So are both sides guilty of this behavior? Or only one? And what’s the solution? Do we need to call for across the board transparency, or just accept that this is the way the political world works these days and deal with it? People can’t have it both ways. You can’t say it’s OK for one side to do it but not the other. You can’t call for transparency from one side but then say that the other can hide whatever it wants. It seems like a lot of selective outrage, again.

This is exactly it. This kind of financial napalm on our elections demands disclosure no matter which political party is benefiting. Thanks for your comment.

sarainitaly said:
NO, I’m talking about half a BILLION dollars, and a lot of it did come from foreign sources, with no disclosure. I suggest you read the links I included.

Either you’re for disclosure or you aren’t. I’m for it.

NORBIT said:
I agree! – It’s the Wall Street – Government Axis of Evil that has perverted this capitalist system.

Now, let’s hear that left-wing condemnation of Barney Frank, who enabled the sub-prime disaster by giving out free taxpayer monies through the government sieves known as Fannie & Freddie! – after being explicitly warned numerous times – ON TAPE! – that this debacle would occur!

How many of those bundled derivatives would have been sold to investors had Barney not put the US government’s AAA imprimatur on them??

I agree. But the right wing is pulling out a small sliver of the pie rather than looking at the big picture. This was a deliberate act–a deliberate theft–with premeditation. Everything else fell into place either because people weren’t doing their jobs or they were deliberately shut down by those on the side of the thieves.

The Fannie/Freddie situation was a de facto contributor but just a small fraction and not the cause. Republican Senator Phil Gramm, who ultimately became a director of UBS–a foreign bank–husband of Enron’s Wendy Gramm, who benefited from his actions in Congress by stealing money from California, put this process into motion. But he wasn’t acting alone — he executed a long-premeditated scheme that’s still playing out. Those overvalued derivatives have not been dealt with, even though they’re “valued” at many times the GDP of the WORLD!

Bush and Paulson’s bailout was grand larceny. Everything about how it was handled was FUBAR. A disgusting public crime.

Marla Louise said:
What is amazing about most of the ‘defense of the Republicans’ post is that they are “two wrongs make a right” arguments, i.e. “The Democrats do it too, nayh nayh, your mother swims after troop ships.”

Wouldn’t it be better that we acknowledge the problem and crack down on campaign financing, both on the left and the right?

Marla

Very true, Marla. Excellent post!

Of course, Stewart devoted appropriate time to Obama turning off all accountability on his online credit card donations, which brought in hundreds of millions, right? Someone remind me why it’s a good thing for a comedian to shape the political views of a generation.

whytee said:
I agree. But the right wing is pulling out a small sliver of the pie rather than looking at the big picture. This was a deliberate act–a deliberate theft–with premeditation. Everything else fell into place either because people weren’t doing their jobs or they were deliberately shut down by those on the side of the thieves. The Fannie/Freddie situation was a de facto contributor but just a small fraction and not the cause. Republican Senator Phil Gramm, who ultimately became a director of UBS–a foreign bank–husband of Enron’s Wendy Gramm, who benefited from his actions in Congress by stealing money from California, put this process into motion. But he wasn’t acting alone — he executed a long-premeditated scheme that’s still playing out. Those overvalued derivatives have not been dealt with, even though they’re “valued” at many times the GDP of the WORLD! Bush and Paulson’s bailout was grand larceny. Everything about how it was handled was FUBAR. A disgusting public crime.

Agreed. In fact Paulson should be arrested for what he did.

However, let’s not forget Clinton’s cronies, Raines, Gerelick & Rubin, who all cashed in to the tune of 100′s of millions by PLUNDERING Freddie, Fannie & Citi respectively.

NORBIT said:
Agreed. In fact Paulson should be arrested for what he did.

However, let’s not forget Clinton’s cronies, Raines, Gerelick & Rubin, who all cashed in to the tune of 100’s of millions by PLUNDERING Freddie, Fannie & Citi respectively.

Norbit, you are speaking my language. Whatever we don’t agree on, we’re on exactly the same page with this. I want Pecora hearings on this whole ugly swindle, and very public prosecutions, no matter how far up the chain of command it goes. If only this could happen in real life.

In an example of corporate malfeasance, Hungary ARRESTED the head of that mining company that drenched toxic sludge and killed people, and the government seized the company. Why can’t we deal with institutional fraud with legitimate ferocity?

NORBIT said:
The Chinese became part of our electoral process when Bill Clinton sold out our nuclear technology to them for a cool $25 million – funnelled through the San Fransisco “monks”!

btw, It was also under Clinton that all the Wall Street regulations were GUTTED!!!

You remember Cinton, he was our first black president! – until Obama’s camp declared him (all together now, the Democrats favorite SMEAR) A RACIST!!!

What was the name of that Bill, Norbit? Who sponsored it?

–Cobra

TfT said:
One could reasonably surmise that the 25M$ that went to GE from the Obama Stimulus package was pay (it back or forward) for the television personalities on NBC/MSNBC complete Obama suckupery.

One could also reasonably surmise that Obama campaign funds coming from GE were from business done in Iran.

The dems little game here is so transparent. If The Chamber did release a list of donars, those donars would become targets of harassment and boycott. Since they’re not going to, that chump Obama thinks he can rile up the stupid, like he used to in Chicago. Unfortunately for him, real Americans aren’t stupid, and can see right through this. He spent so much time being adored by inner city welfare stupidity, that he actually does think of himself as smarter than the rest. Fact is, he’s nothing but a steaming pile of diarrhea, and by far, the worst crook to ever hold the office.

Doesn’t everyone know by now that Rove wins by lying? Get the facts on Rove’s deceitful claims.

Rove deflects criticism of his anonymous donors with torrent of misleading claims

In an attempt to defend against criticism that conservative political groups have put out millions of dollars worth of GOP attack ads from undisclosed donors, Karl Rove has embarked on a media blitz, attempting to create a smokescreen of false and irrelevant claims about liberal groups’ campaign funds.
CLAIM: CAP doesn’t disclose who its donors are

Rove: CAP is “a political group and doesn’t reveal its donors.” On the October 12 edition of ABC’s Good Morning America, Fox News contributor Karl Rove attempted to defend himself against criticism that he’s creating ads funded by undisclosed donors by claiming that “President Obama based his attack [on Rove's undisclosed donors] on a blog posting by Think Progress, which is associated with the Center for American Progress [CAP], a group headed by John Podesta, who was the chairman of the president’s transition. It is a political group, and does not reveal its donors.” Media Research Center president Brent Bozell made a similar claim in a recent column.

FACT: Attacks on CAP are “absurd” because CAP doesn’t “electioneer or run candidate campaign ads”

CAP doesn’t “electioneer or run candidate campaign ads.” In response to Rove’s criticism, CAP released a statement noting that it is not involved in any electioneering, and that it does not run candidate campaign ads:

Neither the Center for American Progress nor the Center for American Progress Action Fund electioneer or run candidate campaign ads. If CAPAF ever does run such ads, we will disclose the donors funding that activity. 501c4′s are not required to disclose donors and we do not see a disclosure problem with 501c4′s, like CAPAF, that continue to operate in the traditional role of a public education and issue advocacy organization; nor have we criticized the Chamber for its traditional work in support of its mission. Our concern is with organizations like the Chamber and others who have taken advantage of the Citizens United ruling to behave like a PAC by running massive amounts of candidate campaign ads without disclosing the source of funding for the ads. There is a long standing legal requirement for PACs to disclose donations, the Chamber and others are acting like PACs but without the disclosure.

Sargent: Rove’s “comparison to the Center for American Progress is absurd, because it does not and has never run campaign ads.” In an October 12 post to his Plum Line blog, Greg Sargent wrote of Rove’s claim: “The comparison to the Center for American Progress is absurd, because it does not and has never run campaign ads.”

CLAIM: MoveOn.org doesn’t disclose their donors

Rove: A “lot of liberal groups” like “MoveOn.org — do not report their donors.” On the October 10 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.’s Fox News Sunday, Rove asserted that “a lot of liberal groups — National Resources Defense Council, League of Conservation Voters, Center for American Progress, AARP, MoveOn.org — do not report their donors.

FACT: MoveOn.org funds political activities through a PAC that discloses its donors

Both MoveOn.org and LCV fund their political activities through PACs, which disclose donors. In fact, MoveOn.org funds its political activities thorugh a political action committee (PACs). This PAC, MoveOn.org Political Action is subject to the same disclosure requirements as political parties, and is required to disclose their PAC donations to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). As Sargent reported, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough retracted the similar claim he made about MoveOn.org Political Action.

CLAIM: Obama’s campaign benefited from groups that don’t disclose their donors

Rove: Obama “had no problem at all with this when groups were spending money on his behalf in 2008 and not disclosing donors.” Also during the October 12 edition of Good Morning America, Rove asserted that “[t]he president is being hypocritical about this. He had no problem at all with this when groups were spending money on his behalf in 2008 and not disclosing donors.”

FACT: During 2008 election, Obama discouraged donations to outside groups

Politico: “Senator Barack Obama’s campaign is steering the candidate’s wealthy supporters away from independent Democratic groups.” Politico’s Ben Smith reported on May 13, 2008, that “Senator Barack Obama’s campaign is steering the candidate’s wealthy supporters away from independent Democratic groups.” Smith added that “major donors have begun to conclude that Obama is serious in trying to cut off funds to the outside groups.”

CLAIM: Obama didn’t disclose its donors

Rove: Obama “had no problem at all not disclosing his own donors.” Also during the October 12 edition of Good Morning America, Rove asserted that Obama “had no problem at all not disclosing his own donors, tens of millions of dollars in contributions to his campaign, that did not — whose donor names were not revealed.”

FACT: Obama disclosed more than 90 percent of his campaign donations

More than 90 percent of Obama’s campaign donations included name and occupation of donor. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, 90.2 percent of all of the donations Obama recieved over $200 were reported to the FEC with the name and occupation of the donor. By contrast, Rove has admitted that one of his groups, American Crossroads GPS, does not disclose the identities of any of its donors.

Research: http://mediamatters.org/research/201010130030

sarainitaly said:
Kind of hypocritical of Obama to be pushing this, considering he refused to release his under $200 donor list, which equaled almost half of one billion dollars.

sarainitaly said:
Although an unusually high percentage (49%) of Obama’s funds came in discrete contributions of $200 or less (see Table 3), only 26% of his money through August 31 (and 24% of his funds through October 15, according to the most recent FEC reports) came from donors whose total contributions aggregated to $200 or less. Obama did not disclose his donor list – 49% that came from contributions of $200 or less.

So before you were claiming that the President rose a half a billion from small donors now you’ve changed your tune because you’ve been confronted by facts. But the President did disclose all donors who contributed over $200. So far Rove and the CoC have disclosed none whether they contributed a $1 or $1 Million.

Azarkhan said:
JamesA1102 (who loves Obama so much he is willing to lie for him) is wrong. Here is the real number: President-elect Barack Obama raised a record-breaking $745 million throughout his presidential campaign, the Federal Election Committee reported Thursday. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2008/reportersblog/2008/12/obama_campaign_fundraising_tot.html

I’m not lying for anyone. I was commenting on the numbers from the CFI site: http://www.cfinst.org/Press/PReleases/08-11-24/Realty_Check_-_Obama_Small_Donors.aspx

Azarkhan said:
It sure would. But unfortunately the Supreme Court has ruled that campaign financing is protected by the First Amendment. BTW, no need to rehash Citizens United. Let’s go right to Buckley v. Valeo, 1976.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckley_v._Valeo

So how do we change it? It’s going to need politicians on the right and left to want to do it. How does one get both sides in the same boat?

Marla Louise said:
So how do we change it? It’s going to need politicians on the right and left to want to do it. How does one get both sides in the same boat?

We can make demands of our elected officials and pass campaign finance reform but it requires conservatives and liberals to agree on some details.

CosmosDan said:
We can make demands of our elected officials and pass campaign finance reform but it requires conservatives and liberals to agree on some details.

So far, the pen (a letter to our elected representatives) is still mightier than the sword…so far, that is. We are losing our freedoms by the day, and it all comes down to one thing:

We the People are being played for suckers. The Washington elite are playing both ends against the middle, creating smoke screens (petty arguments that really don’t amount to a hill of beans), that keep the electorates’ bowels in an uproar. They keep the vast majority pitted against one another as they serve their puppet masters.

There are many who are trying to destroy out nation and its Constitutionn, and they reside on BOTH sides of the aisle. These are the so-called “progressives,” I unabashedly call them traitors.

While it happens that–currently–most of these traitors are flying the flag of the Democrat Party, the Republicans have more than their share. Among the traitorous Republicans are Lindsay Graham, Olympia Snowe, Scott Brown, Zach Wamp, Jim Ramstad, Lamar Alexander, Michael Steele, John McCain, Alan Keyes, and quite a few others. (You can figure out whom are the “progressive” Democrats for yourselves, but -0bama should top the list!)

JamesA1102 said:
So before you were claiming that the President rose a half a billion from small donors now you’ve changed your tune because you’ve been confronted by facts. But the President did disclose all donors who contributed over $200. So far Rove and the CoC have disclosed none whether they contributed a $1 or $1 Million.

Change my tune? I said the SAME thing, only the second time I used the exact quote from the article YOU linked to.

“under $200 donor list, which equaled almost half of one billion dollars.”

“Although an unusually high percentage (49%) of Obama’s funds came in discrete contributions of $200 or less ”

Obama raised nearly one billion dollars – nearly half (49%) came from contributions of %200 or less. How am I saying anything different?

It’s the same thing.

“But the President did disclose all donors who contributed over $200. ” – He had to, it’s the law. McCain released all of his donors. Obama refused to release his under $200 donor list. Even after numerous problems/illegal donors were discovered with his other donors.

oops $200, not %200

pyrope says: “So far, the pen (a letter to our elected representatives) is still mightier than the sword…so far, that is. We are losing our freedoms by the day, and it all comes down to one thing:
We the People are being played for suckers.”

Again, these are not the words of a Mensa certified commenter. What freedoms are being lost “by the day?”

“We the People” means different things to different people. We the People have been played for suckers since 1886 when a court reporter inserted the idea of corporate personhood into the header of a court ruling. Corporations are property, not persons, not “artificial individuals.”

If there are “freedoms” being lost, they pale compared to how the last SCOTUS sold We the People out with their Citizens United v. FEC decision, probably the worse decision since the Dred Scott decision. We are witnessing the corporate take over of America, and an existential threat to our republic. Hopefully a “Mensa” member can see this and join the fight against impending plutocracy.

welcome to :
===== http://www.goshops.org/ ======
This is a shopping paradise