Magox Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 President Barack Obama — in an act of hypocrisy or necessity, depending on the beholder — has reversed course and is now blessing the efforts of a sputtering super PAC, Priorities USA Action, organized to fight GOP dark-money attacks. On Monday morning, Obama reviled the “negative” tone of the super PACs, a dominant fundraising source in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. But by the evening, word leaked to POLITICO that Obama had offered his support for Priorities USA Action, which thus far has raised a fraction of what GOP-backed groups have raked in. Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72531.html#ixzz1li8pI9nT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I'm not certain his line of work permits him to maintain any credibility when it comes to the Super Pacs. I mean, he's not big on credibility anyway, but anyone who thought he'd take the high road when it came to campaign funds is DIN-level stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 this is probably why 50% of eligble age voters just don't care to show up to polls.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 this is probably why 50% of eligble age voters just don't care to show up to polls.... Maybe some, but not nearly the majority. Alot of people just don't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 ROBERT REICH: Obama Has Handed The Election Over To The Super Rich How many billionaires does it take to buy a presidential election? “With so much at stake” wrote Obama campaign manager Jim Messina on the Obama campaign’s blog, Obama couldn’t “unilaterally disarm.” But would refusing to be corrupted this way really amount to unilateral disarmament? To the contrary, I think it would have given the President a rallying cry that nearly all Americans would get behind: “More of the nation’s wealth and political power is now in the hands of fewer people and large corporations than since the era of the robber barons of the Gilded Age. I will not allow our democracy to be corrupted by this! I will fight to take back our government!” Small donations would have flooded the Obama campaign, overwhelming Romney’s billionaire super PACs. The people would have been given a chance to be heard. The sad truth is Obama has never really occupied the high ground. He refused public financing in 2008. Once president, he didn’t go to bat for a system of public financing that would have made it possible for candidates to raise enough money from small donors and matching public funds they wouldn’t need to rely on a few billionaires pumping unlimited sums into super PACS. He hasn’t even fought for public disclosure of super PAC donations. And now he’s made a total mockery of the Court’s naïve belief that super PACs would remain separate from individual campaigns, by officially endorsing his own super PAC, and allowing campaign manager Jim Messina and even cabinet officers to speak at his super PAC events. Obama will not appear but he, Michelle Obama, and Vice President Joe Biden will encourage support of the super PAC. One Obama adviser says Obama’s decision to endorse his super PAC has had an immediate effect. “Our donors get it,” the official said, adding that they now want to “go fight the other side.” Exactly. So now a relative handful of super-rich Democrats want fight a relative handful of super-rich Republicans. And we call that a democracy. Business Insider This is really a double hypocrisy, since this is the ruling that Mr. Obama publicly scolded the Supreme Court at the previous State of the Union Address. Now he joins right in. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 RUT ROW. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/designer-gear-for-obama-raising-a-ruckus.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Obama Campaign Chief Seeks to Assure Wall Street QBy Hans Nichols - Feb 8, 2012 Feb. 8 (Bloomberg) — Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s campaign manager, assured a group of Democratic donors from the financial services industry that Obama won’t demonize Wall Street as he stresses populist appeals in his re-election campaign, according to two people at the meeting. At the members-only Core Club in Manhattan, Messina provided a campaign briefing last night for some of the president’s top donors, including Ralph Schlosstein, chief executive officer at Evercore Partners Inc., and his wife, Jane Hartley, co-founder of the economic and political advisory firm Observatory Group LLC; Eric Mindich, founder of Eton Park Capital Management LP; and Ron Blaylock, co-founder of GenNx360 Capital Partners. Bloomberg . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Bloomberg . What are the Vegas odds on him holding to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 What are the Vegas odds on him holding to that? I'm guessing in direct proportion to the minute after the checks are cashed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 RUT ROW. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/designer-gear-for-obama-raising-a-ruckus.html You'd think that those "fabulous" handbags from those "fabulous" fashion designers would work for Santorum since he apparently represents every guy who needs more rooster in their ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 You'd think that those "fabulous" handbags from those "fabulous" fashion designers would work for Santorum since he apparently represents every guy who needs more rooster in their ass. (coffee ALL over my !@#$ing desk!!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Political Cartoon ........Obama's hypocrisy . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Political Cartoon ........Obama's hypocrisy . But it's not hypocrisy when you deserve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 But it's not hypocrisy when you deserve it. Thats true Tom.............................Laws and rules are for “The little people”, besides WE WON! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 Check this video out. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/02/08/obama_in_2007_you_cant_be_against_outside_groups_and_then_for_them.html In a 2007 campaign stop in Iowa then-Senator Obama railed against outside groups and their influence in an election. In this clip he talks about John Edwards and a group supporting him that is "getting around campaign finance laws." "You can't say yesterday you don't believe in them and today you have three-quarters of a million dollars being spent for you," Obama said. "You can't just talk the talk," Obama told an audience during the campaign event. "The easiest thing in the world is to talk about change during election time. Everybody talks about change at election time. You've got to look at how do they act when it's not convenient, when it's harder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Thats true Tom.............................Laws and rules are for “The little people”, besides WE WON! . I just hope he runs on the "Hope and Change" message again. Because as a re-election message, that'd be a hoot. Check this video out. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/02/08/obama_in_2007_you_cant_be_against_outside_groups_and_then_for_them.html "You can't just talk the talk," Obama told an audience during the campaign event. "The easiest thing in the world is to talk about change during election time. Everybody talks about change at election time. You've got to look at how do they act when it's not convenient, when it's harder." That's more ironic than DIN calling me an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 I just hope he runs on the "Hope and Change" message again. Because as a re-election message, that'd be a hoot. That's more ironic than DIN calling me an idiot. I'm sure Old (*^*&%^$^#over at Meet the press won't show this clip this weekend while interviewing one of the whitehouse's mouthpieces Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 It's worse than you can imagine. Even Nancy Pelosi . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 It's worse than you can imagine. Even Nancy Pelosi . Man, that chick has a ton of free time on her hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Man, that chick has a ton of free time on her hands. I'm good with it. As long as she's wasting time with nonsense like that, she's not !@#$ing around in Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts