• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Obama sells out and breaks his word again

A

Anonymous

Guest
McCain promises to spend more taxpayer money than Obama
Friday, June 20, 2008

Yesterday, Obama confused conservatives everywhere by announcing that he will not be spending any taxpayer money for his campaign, instead using private donations. Conservatives immediately attacked Obama, not realizing that they are ironically attacking him for doing exactly those things that they claim to love. Next thing you know, conservatives will be telling us that health care should be funded by taxpayers, rather than privately. What’s next? Will the conservatives argue that we should nationalize our oil companies?

Obama ain't no dummy- he's been able to raise $272 Million dollars (mostly in small individual donations) in comparison to McCains $98 Milliion-- and the money is still coming in at a 3 to 1 rate- he's not going to limit his campaign to just spending $85 million taxpayer dollars :roll:

They were talking on Tv- that with the funding that Obama now has he can spend $3.5 million dollars on every state- many of which before McCain didn't think would be an issue....

And McCain- the author of McCain/Feingold was the one that this year began using the loophole in his own law - and has been getting his money from $100,000 a plate dinners and fundraisers- raising the money for Freedoms Watch and the RNC- which then can funnel it back by campaigning for him....Essentially just going around his own law-- Now that is HYPOCRISY....

Quote of the Day :lol: :p :clap:
Obama says that McCain-Feingold is obsolete. He probably has to watch his tongue and not say McCain is obsolete.

News from the Votemaster

Barack Obama stated yesterday that he won't take public funding for his campaign, thereby breaking an agreement he had with John McCain to do so if both were nominated. He'll take some flak about that for a week, but when the dust has settled he will probably have $300 million to spend from private donations and McCain will get $85 million from the government. Obama says that McCain-Feingold is obsolete. He probably has to watch his tongue and not say McCain is obsolete. His argument is that although McCain-Feingold regulates the candidates spending, 527 groups like Moveon.org (D) and Freedom's Watch (R) can raise and spend whatever they want to, making the campaign limits a sham.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
The "he ain't no dummy" is certainly debatable. One thing that he is for sure is a liar. He went back on his word for one thing - money. I guess politicians doing that isn't part of the "change" he talks about. He was all about campaigns being funded by the government until he did a comparison on how it would affect HIM - then all of a sudden he changed his tune. This guy is about integrity? :shock: :roll:

So what is he going to change, anyway? For some reason, he never seems to say.......
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
While I agree it is a Flip-Flop-- its a "smart one"....Nothing compared to the daily flip flops pandering for votes McCain makes - don't drill, drill, drill halfway down :roll: amnesty, no amnesty, amnesty (depending on which group you talk to :roll: ) support troops, don't support troops & vote against GI bill for troops- I don't support Bush, I support Bush, who the hell is Bush--Free trade is good, Free Trade is bankrupting us, I'm the biggest Free Trader in the country :roll: -- etc. etc. etc.

McCain was stuck with public financing because he used it as collateral to get a loan early to keep operating when his campaign was broke....

Several months ago- when McCain couldn't tap anymore Big money/K Street/ Banker/Military Industrialist ("100 years of war"- "Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran" :roll: )Telecommunication/Lobbyist folks for anymore, he and the RNC opened up the game when they started making the fundraisers not for him- but for Progress for America, Freedom's Watch, (both groups he formerly said shouldn't be allowed to take soft money) and the RNC....
They have set up the same "pioneers" and "rangers' type designations for anyone that can bring in $100,000 or more the same as GW did (and which McCain said then was illegal)....If I remember right Jack Abramoff was a "pioneer" for GW :wink: :lol: :p

Campaign contributions are limited to $2,300 per person in the general election. Obama has built his cash advantage largely with donations of less than $200.

But donors can give up to $28,500 each to party committees, which can spend up to $19 million in coordinated spending in behalf of the candidates. The committees can also spend unlimited amounts in activities not coordinated with their candidate. That usually means negative ads, biographical ads and targeted efforts at turning out voters, Corrado said.

Duncan said he is encouraged by the 165,000 new donors to the RNC and the 800,000 donors overall. And the committee had $54 million in cash on hand at the end of May, he said.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/18/20080618mccainfunding0618.html
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
The "he ain't no dummy" is certainly debatable. One thing that he is for sure is a liar. He went back on his word for one thing - money. I guess politicians doing that isn't part of the "change" he talks about. He was all about campaigns being funded by the government until he did a comparison on how it would affect HIM - then all of a sudden he changed his tune. This guy is about integrity? :shock: :roll:

So what is he going to change, anyway? For some reason, he never seems to say.......



Excuse me....but what about Bush saying he was no way into ' nation building"? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1710.htm

But wait....I guess he meant 'nation destroying' really and he got ' confusated', he does that a lot!!! :roll: :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
McCain-founded organization funded by leftist George Soros
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow - 2/13/2008 10:40:00 AM

Author and investigative journalist Jerome Corsi says some critics of GOP presidential candidate John McCain are concerned about a non-profit organization he founded in 2001 that has received funding from left-wing donors like George Soros and Teresa Heinz-Kerry.

Dr. Jerome Corsi recently published an article in WorldNetDaily which focuses on the Reform Institute, which Senator McCain (R-Arizona) used to promote his political agenda and to provide compensation to key campaign operatives between elections. The best-selling author says critics are questioning McCain's conservative credentials in light of the fact that prominent leftists have donated heavily to this organization.

"It's shocking to think that George Soros and Teresa Heinz-Kerry have [had] this kind of funding hook to John McCain for so many years," notes Corsi. "I think it explains how this foundation backed and promoted McCain's various leftist positions, as in campaign reform and in immigration where he wanted to open borders."

Corsi says even though McCain was forced to sever his formal ties with the Reform Institute in 2006 in the wake of a controversial cable television contribution, the fact that he was willing to accept money from individuals like Soros and Heinz-Kerry reveals his "true colors" as someone who has always championed leftist causes.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=67091


WASHINGTON — Allies of Sen. John McCain opened a Washington think tank in 2001 to promote transparency and accountability in government, a signature issue for the Arizona Republican after his presidential primary loss to George W. Bush.

For the next seven years, the non-profit Reform Institute churned out position papers and offered expert testimony on campaign finance reform, the need for bipartisanship and other issues, frequently supporting McCain's positions.

But behind the scenes, the institute's practices have at times arguably been at odds with its reformist message, and with McCain's political identity as an enemy of special interests. In fact, the Reform Institute has stretched and may have broken rules governing charitable organizations, according to experts on tax law.

The institute has twice omitted the names of donors in IRS filings. IRS rules require that charities identify their contributors to government regulators.

In 2003 and 2004, a telecommunications company with business before the McCain-led Senate Commerce Committee contributed a total of $200,000 to the institute. The contributions were solicited by Rick Davis, a veteran Washington lobbyist who was president of the institute from 2003 through 2005 and who is now McCain's campaign manager.

Davis is among more than a dozen Reform Institute advisers, directors or consultants who have played roles in McCain's 2008 presidential campaign. And while the institute says it is non-political, critics say its agenda has closely mirrored key elements of the McCain platform.

"Even if they didn't say 'vote for McCain,' their activities promoted and enhanced McCain," said Frances Hill, director of the program on taxation at the University of Miami Law School. "That is something that a tax-exempt organization can't do.

"There are red flags all over this," Hill said.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-mccain-davis_tuejun17,0,5274429.story

And for you hard core Neocon Republican "cultists" that don't believe Conservative Corsi- here is one of your spokespeople saying the same thing-- McCain is a crook and a hypocrite that plays both sides for his own benefit and pocketbook- and has a long history of it......He's sold out to the same interests that juggle King Georges puppet strings....You can't convince me that an old dog (really old) is going to learn new tricks.... :( :mad:

Interestingly some of these "snidely" ways of campaign financing- and using taxpayer funds to take a trip to Canada to make a political speach- (as McCain did last week) were being discussed on the news today- along with all the other "perks" Senators and Congressmen have-- and it was brought up that one Congressman that refuses to accept many of the perks and turns back unused budget money was Ron Paul...


Hernandez, Soros, and the “Reform Institute”
By Michelle Malkin • January 25, 2008 03:50 PM

Follow the bouncing ball with me:

Shamnesty peddler John McCain taps former Mexican government official/shamnesty advocate Juan Hernandez as his presidential campaign Hispanic Outreach Director.

Hernandez is a fellow at McCain’s “Reform Institute.” What has he been working on there for the past year?
---------------------------

The Reform Institute is a tax-exempt, supposedly independent 501(c)(3) group, as Ed Morrissey noted two years ago, “that employs Rick Davis, who also works on McCain’s staff as his chief political advisor, and they pay him $110,000 per year. The Reform Institute has often supported McCain, paid for events highlighting him and his agenda, presumably including campaign finance reform.” The Reform Institute received $200,000 in donations from Cablevision…and McCain basically tried to intervene on Cablevision’s behalf by writing a letter to the FCC supporting its regulatory agenda. Morrissey noted at the time: “[T]he Reform Institute helps keep McCain’s staff gainfully employed between campaigns, allowing McCain to do less fundraising while retaining the best of the available talent. For instance, Carl Hulse and Ann Kornblut note that Rick Davis managed McCain’s presidential campaign in 2000 before founding Reform Institute. Now its president, he gets over $100,000 a year from RI for “consulting services”. That money allows Davis to remain available for McCain’s future campaigns, and the funding he raises for RI gives him inroads for building support.”

Yep. Which is exactly how it worked out. Davis is now McCain’s campaign manager.
-------------------------

Who funded the Reform Institute, which boasts Juan “Think Mexico First” Hernandez as its resident amnesty fellow? The donor list is a who’s who of ultra left-wing, open borders elites. Again, via Ed Morrissey’s research:

* The Tides Foundation, which heavily promotes “reproductive justice”, giving over $500,000 to pro-abortion efforts. They also actively oppose the death penalty (so do I, FYI). John McCain opposes abortion and supports the death penalty, so why is his chief political advisor getting so much support from those who ostensibly oppose him?

* Educational Foundation Of America, which also supports abortion. EFA also opposes drilling in ANWR, an issue on which McCain has an ambivalent record. It also supports euthanasia and assisted suicide through the Death With Dignity National Center, a group which it gave $45,000. It gave $100,000 to the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, which opposed the Yucca Mountain nuclear depository (McCain supported it), and opposes development of low-yield nuclear “bunker buster” bombs, which McCain supports.

In fact, EFA appears to contribute to just about every left-wing cause imaginable, as well as a number of noncontriversial charities and outreach efforts.

* The Proteus Fund, which also opposed the Yucca Mountain repository, spending $75K to stop it. That pales in comparison to the $935K they spent on supporting gay marriage initiatives, which McCain strongly opposes. They have also spent over $800,000 funding nuclear-disarmament and antiwar causes in each of the last two years. Their Security Policy Working Group contains nothing but left-of-center groups like Project on Defense Alternatives, which calls the Iraqi elections “faulty” and predicted disaster for the Bush administration’s “program of coercive transformation throughout the region.”

* OSI (Open Society Institute), founded and funded by George Soros. Among a litany of left-wing causes supported by OSI are People For The American Way, to support their Supreme Court Project. (Hint: It isn’t intended on assisting Bush get his nominees confirmed.) They also gave $150,000 to the Campaign Legal Center, which will be important shortly.

* David Geffen Foundation also shows up on the list, although not in the top tier. David Geffen is an entertainment-industry mogul who supports Democrats and left-wing causes. They do not have a website I could find, but Activistcash.com notes that in 2002, most of the grants Geffen gave went to environmental activists and the Tides Foundation and Tides Center.

Via Discover the Networks, you’ll see that Soros’s OSI is a key open borders funder–providing support to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; the Immigrant Legal Resource Center; the National Immigration Law Center; the National Immigration Forum; the National Council of La Raza; and the American Immigration Law Foundation.

Remind me again which party’s presidential nomination John McCain is running for?

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/01/25/meet-the-open-borders-family-mccain-hernandez-soros-and-the-reform-institute/
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Sandhusker said:
The "he ain't no dummy" is certainly debatable. One thing that he is for sure is a liar. He went back on his word for one thing - money. I guess politicians doing that isn't part of the "change" he talks about. He was all about campaigns being funded by the government until he did a comparison on how it would affect HIM - then all of a sudden he changed his tune. This guy is about integrity? :shock: :roll:

So what is he going to change, anyway? For some reason, he never seems to say.......



Excuse me....but what about Bush saying he was no way into ' nation building"? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1710.htm

But wait....I guess he meant 'nation destroying' really and he got ' confusated', he does that a lot!!! :roll: :roll:

What somebody else says and does in no way changes what Obama did. How does that make him any better than the rest? He preaches about "change" and you make excuses for him when he does the same crap as the guy you bash all the time. Really makes a lot of sense....

So what the hell is he going to change, anyhow? I guess it isn't about honoring one's word.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
kolanuraven said:
Sandhusker said:
The "he ain't no dummy" is certainly debatable. One thing that he is for sure is a liar. He went back on his word for one thing - money. I guess politicians doing that isn't part of the "change" he talks about. He was all about campaigns being funded by the government until he did a comparison on how it would affect HIM - then all of a sudden he changed his tune. This guy is about integrity? :shock: :roll:

So what is he going to change, anyway? For some reason, he never seems to say.......



Excuse me....but what about Bush saying he was no way into ' nation building"? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1710.htm

But wait....I guess he meant 'nation destroying' really and he got ' confusated', he does that a lot!!! :roll: :roll:

What somebody else says and does in no way changes what Obama did. How does that make him any better than the rest? He preaches about "change" and you make excuses for him when he does the same crap as the guy you bash all the time. Really makes a lot of sense....

So what the hell is he going to change, anyhow? I guess it isn't about honoring one's word.


So he changed his mind.....where's your argument ?????


Wait a minute.....I know why you guys are all in a tizzy!! :!: :!: :!:


You're not used to having a ( hopeful) President with enough brain power TO CHANGE HIS MIND once he thinks over his options.

You are all used to the " guns a'blazing...no matter what...we'll count'em after they're dead" ideal.

Different days a' coming boys.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
He just "changed his mind"? Geeeeeeeze. With standards that loose, there is no such thing as breaking a campaign pledge or promise of any kind - it's just changing one's mind.

Maybe Bush just changed his mind on nation building? Does he get the same pass that Obama does?

So what the heck is going to be different? I've asked what the change is going to be a dozen times and nobody can answer. You're buying into this "change" and "yes we can" lip flapping, but you can't explain that change that's getting your vote. It really shows depth of thought....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hopefully one of the changes will be that he doesn't have the 30 years of connections to Big Money/Big Corporate Lobbyists and Bureaucracy as I posted above that McCain has-- and we all knew Hitlery had..

Senator Barack Obama, as he becomes his party’s presumptive presidential nominee, is starting to exert his authority over the Democratic National Committee. A first step? New fund-raising guidelines.

Mr. Obama is announcing today that the D.N.C. will no longer accept contributions from federal lobbyists or political action committees, which follows the rules he established for his own campaign last year.

As of April 30th, according to Center for Responsive Politics.

Financial data available for Obama:

Oil & Gas: $0
Lobbyists: $0
General Contractors: $0
PAC: $-750
Individual contributions $264,493,051 100%

Financial data available for McCain:

Oil & Gas: $723,777
Lobbyists: $655,576
PAC: $960,990
General Contractors: $668,612
Individual contributions $88,221,824 91%

Financial data available for Clinton:

Oil & Gas: $0
Lobbyists: $0
PAC: $1,251,170
General Contractors: $0
Individual contributions: $192,239,572 89%
No Disclosure: $14,128,400

McCains history goes back to the Keating 5- and it looks like it ain't changed with his continuing to sell influence for political contributions...And being in the pockets of the military industrial complex- or any Lobbyist that waves enough $..

Also Obama endorses the Paygo-- balanced budget plan-- while McCain hasn't, instead saying he will cut more taxes- and spend 100 years in Iraq- which means only one thing, that not only will our kids and grandkids be paying for the bills the Repubs have ran up- but our great grandkids will too.... :shock: :(
Our economy can't stand 4 more years of Bush/McSame economic policy- (with the likes of Enron Loophole Scandal Sen Phil Gramm as his lead economic advisor. :roll: )..........

And as an instructor of Constitutional Law- Obama at least knows what the Constitution is- which anymore I'm unsure if this current Neocon Republicans do.... :cry:

Like Paul said:
Having a Republican win the upcoming presidential election is “secondary” for Paul who is more interested in defending the Constitution, having the country go in what he considers the right direction, having a sound currency, and achieving balanced budgets.

and the Obama Republicans site says

While there will always be important issues on which thoughtful Americans will disagree, there are others that cannot be up for debate— our economic prosperity and our standing in the world.

Not saying I will vote for Obama- but I'm going to check them all out and see where everyone stands- and make a decision on those issues which I think are important-- and recognizing that there are laws and the Constitution are 2 of the most important for me...Followed by someone who promotes America first- rather than foreign nationbuilding and building empires, either in Iraq or with a NAU (with a Mexican govt. official as his campaign advisor :roll: )....From there on I know there is no candidate I will ever totally agree with.....I didn't agree with all Pauls ideas either.....But we definitely need to go a new direction- and I don't see that with McSame.....
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Changing your mind on an issue that affects this country is admirable. Like McCain changing his mind on drilling offshore, he had one opinion when gas was $1.00 a gallon and now that it is almost $5.00 he realizes the need to change it for the better of the Country!

Obama is changing his mind and flip flopping for the better of himself. And in doing so he has shown he is no different than any other Politician. He may find it advantages, but when the ads come out showing him saying he will use public financing and then sold out for more money it will hurt his Change platform. Just another time he shot himself in the foot!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OT, "Hopefully one of the changes will be ..."

Hopefully? This flipping guy has been talking "change" for months and liberals have been chanting it back and are supporting him because of it, but when asked what he is going to change, you reply that "hopefully, it's..." and nobody else can answer at all? People are voting for an over-used buzzsword and not asking the questions that have to be asked. I don't understand how Democrats can be so gullible.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
OT, "Hopefully one of the changes will be ..."

Hopefully? This flipping guy has been talking "change" for months and liberals have been chanting it back and are supporting him because of it, but when asked what he is going to change, you reply that "hopefully, it's..." and nobody else can answer at all? People are voting for an over-used buzzsword and not asking the questions that have to be asked. I don't understand how Democrats can be so gullible.

I voted for Bush on what his campaign compassionate conservatism promises were too- health care reform- major tort reform- no nation building- reduced government- bipartisan cooperation etc.-etc.-- and he did none of them :mad: ....Exactly the opposite on most... :mad:

Tell me what McCain stands for :???: Not last weeks position- or yesterdays - but what he says today :roll: :( :wink: :p

Doesn't matter-his history shows he's all over the place depending on who he's talking to or who's putting money in his pocket that day- and like Bush it doesn't matter what he says today- because he'll do different tomorrow...

Bushenomics spend like a drunken sailor on borrowed money hasn't worked--mortgaged our childrens and grandchildrens future-- and McSames promises of continued tax cuts for the corporates and elite, while still nationbuilding with 100 years in Iraq will mean our greatgrandchildren will be picking up the bill :( ....

You can't operate a business or a ranch that way-- nor a government...Bills need to be paid....

And the erosion of our Constitution and laws of the land by Bush is now being recognized by Rep and Dem alike.....

Nope- I'm like Dr. Paul- and we need a CHANGE in direction....Even if it means more taxes- we need a President that cares more for the people of the US- than those of Iraq or Mexico....And McSame sure doesn't represent that change... :roll: :(

Having a Republican win the upcoming presidential election is “secondary” for Paul who is more interested in defending the Constitution, having the country go in what he considers the right direction, having a sound currency, and achieving balanced budgets.

Anyway- NOBODY could be worse than Bush...
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Sure, we need a change, but we had better make sure it is a change for the better, you can always get worse. We don't know what Obama will change or how, at what cost, etc.. because he doesn't say and nobody asks! I can see how somebody that mentions "change" after Bush would perk some ears, but geeeeeze, you've got to dig a lot deeper before you decide if this guy should be the next President! Once again, the shallowness and gullibility of Democrats astounds me.
 

Latest posts

Top