Speaking of Billionaires...Manipulation...Crony Capitalism...

[Jroc]

Ya got one!

Yeah? Sooo you would agree that the Republicans have no more big money donors than the Democrats right? and they are just as much if not more crony capitalist than the Republicans are right? and the bull pushed by the Democrat party machine that they are more for the "Common man" is just that right?

No my post points back to the OP making assertions outside of the facts. There are no laws broken here. No quid pro quo.

There is no hypocrisy on the part of the left. If the Koch Brothers were being accused of illegal activities by the administration, you would see them being frogmarched into Federal Court. But they're not. Instead, their wealth has doubled during Obama's tenure.

Same laws apply to democratic donors.

Which law is any party breaking?

The leftist on this board moan and cry that the rich donors are all on the Republican side, while they are silent as we point out differently. That's called hypocrisy. I pointed out some of the laws Obama ignores, and is applauded by the left as he does it.

 

[francoHFW]

The rich getting MUCH richer won't change until they pay their fair share in taxes. THEY'RE NOT ILLEGAL (SHOULD BE), JUST OBSCENE, AND LYING TO THE HATER DUPES...

 

[Ropey]

Ya got one!

And here I thought you were a left leaning liberal supporting a liberal democracy and not a leftist supporting... well you know.

If you'll provide an accurate scale from extreme right to leftist, I'll try to pinpoint my location for you!

I don't need to provide your position. You'll do that. I've just come back in and started reading the political section so I'll soon learn where you stand.

You didn't seem to mind the term 'leftist' and accepted it as if you are one and there is a clear delineation between the two so I wondered. Time will provide it.

 

[OKTexas]

So it's just a saying? Kind of like "secret Muslim?"

Sorry, ii'm new. I don't know when you're just kidding.

Carry on, you'll fit right in with the other libs here, deflection is noted and just a hint, spell check is your friend, most all browsers have one.

Sorry, it's a quote. I can't change the spelling.

ii'm not talking about what you had in quotes?

 

[Impenitent]

Carry on, you'll fit right in with the other libs here, deflection is noted and just a hint, spell check is your friend, most all browsers have one.

Sorry, it's a quote. I can't change the spelling.

ii'm not talking about what you had in quotes?

Only one of us typed that intentionally.

You don't know how hard "thumbing it" is on an iphone. I have to fix a lot. I didn't consider ii'm to be worth the trouble!

I'm only guilty of being too lazy - not too stupid (this time.)

 

[william the wie]

My guess is that Obama is counting on the collapse of China (predicted continuously since at least 2001 by Gordon Chang among many late comers such as McKinsey and Chanos) to bail out the US economy. While Chinese strikes and capital flight are hitting new highs there are multiple problems with this strategy:

Chinese workers are being replaced by automation based in NAFTA, not necessarily in the US.

When located in the US the equipment is usually imported. Used but usable imported equipment is cheapest in the US because the US has no VAT. Therefore the capital equipment that brings jobs to the US will be subtracted from GDP as imports and never be added back in since it will be used equipment.

Therefore replacing 1,000 Chinese workers with 1-10 equipment repairmen, probably not even working in the US, running equipment that will be subtracted from US GDP, if located in the US.

This is supposed to bail his ass how?

 

[Impenitent]

And here I thought you were a left leaning liberal supporting a liberal democracy and not a leftist supporting... well you know.

If you'll provide an accurate scale from extreme right to leftist, I'll try to pinpoint my location for you!

I don't need to provide your position. You'll do that. I've just come back in and started reading the political section so I'll soon learn where you stand.

You didn't seem to mind the term 'leftist' and accepted it as if you are one and there is a clear delineation between the two so I wondered. Time will provide it.

Assuming that "left-wing bomb thrower" and "right-wing bomb thrower" are the two bookends, I'd be just to the right of the former, although, if I'd met Bernadette Dohrn in college, all bets are off what I'd be!

 

[Clementine]

A San Francisco Billionaire Just Bought Obama and Delayed the Keystone XL Pipeline

Obama being bought...just in time for the Mid-Terms...Isn't he telling he wants to deal with Republicans regarding the economy...rather than focus on ObamaCare...?

Bunch of threads around here decrying the KOCH Brothers and Billionaires being for the rich Republicans....Hey Statist Libs...WHERE are you on this? Deany? Anyone...?

While the media is obsessed with the Koch brothers this campaign season, a billionaire hedge fund manager from San Francisco just bought off the White House to the tune of $100 million in order to delay the Keystone XL pipeline decision.
From Fox News:

The Obama administration once again has punted on a final decision for the Keystone XL pipeline, announcing ahead of the holiday weekend it is extending a key review period indefinitely — a move that could push off a determination until after the midterm elections.

Republicans, as well as red-state Democrats who want the proposed Canada-to-Texas pipeline approved, slammed the administration for the delay. Democrats even threatened to find ways to go around the president to get the project approved.

“It’s absolutely ridiculous that this well over five year long process is continuing for an undetermined amount of time,” Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., said in a statement.
​

What you won’t hear about in mainstream media is how Billionaire Tom Steyer drove the decision by promising to spend $100 million to help Democrats in the midterm election who help defeat the project...

The corruption continues...

What's the problem?

I thought corporations were people and money was speech!

Are you denying his money the right to talk?

What kind of republicans are you?

It's one thing to believe that a candidate has what it takes to tackle this country's problems and get behind them with support and money. It's quite another to offer up the "support" as a bribe to receive special favors from those who are supposed to be serving the people.

Campaign money is to help get people elected, but in an honest world, it would mean once the people are in office, they carry on with their campaign promises. Those promises are why we vote and we should expect them to live up to their word.

In this case, it's sheer corruption where money talks and what's good for the people doesn't get considered. It's all about taking money for their own greedy purposes and those handing the money over have just purchased power of the government.

Big difference and it does matter why people donate money and what they expect for it. I donate to campaigns, though not a lot. Point is that I support candidates who have good ideas. All I want is for them to do everything in their power to live up to the promises made on the campaign trail. The wealthy should expect the same and nothing more. I would give millions if I could afford it and do it simply to put the best people in Washington.

It's not fair to the little people when someone can buy votes or influence decisions made by elected officials. They should go to jail.

 

[Ropey]

If you'll provide an accurate scale from extreme right to leftist, I'll try to pinpoint my location for you!

I don't need to provide your position. You'll do that. I've just come back in and started reading the political section so I'll soon learn where you stand.

You didn't seem to mind the term 'leftist' and accepted it as if you are one and there is a clear delineation between the two so I wondered. Time will provide it.

Assuming that "left-wing bomb thrower" and "right-wing bomb thrower" are the two bookends, I'd be just to the right of the former, although, if I'd met Bernadette Dohrn in college, all bets are off what I'd be!

Leftist vs Liberal Democrat

 

[thereisnospoon]

This is nothing new, just more out in the open with this regime that thinks it's above the law.

Specifically, what law would that be?

HA! All of them.

 

[Impenitent]

A San Francisco Billionaire Just Bought Obama and Delayed the Keystone XL Pipeline

Obama being bought...just in time for the Mid-Terms...Isn't he telling he wants to deal with Republicans regarding the economy...rather than focus on ObamaCare...?

Bunch of threads around here decrying the KOCH Brothers and Billionaires being for the rich Republicans....Hey Statist Libs...WHERE are you on this? Deany? Anyone...?

The corruption continues...

What's the problem?

I thought corporations were people and money was speech!

Are you denying his money the right to talk?

What kind of republicans are you?

It's one thing to believe that a candidate has what it takes to tackle this country's problems and get behind them with support and money. It's quite another to offer up the "support" as a bribe to receive special favors from those who are supposed to be serving the people.

Campaign money is to help get people elected, but in an honest world, it would mean once the people are in office, they carry on with their campaign promises. Those promises are why we vote and we should expect them to live up to their word.

In this case, it's sheer corruption where money talks and what's good for the people doesn't get considered. It's all about taking money for their own greedy purposes and those handing the money over have just purchased power of the government.

Big difference and it does matter why people donate money and what they expect for it. I donate to campaigns, though not a lot. Point is that I support candidates who have good ideas. All I want is for them to do everything in their power to live up to the promises made on the campaign trail. The wealthy should expect the same and nothing more. I would give millions if I could afford it and do it simply to put the best people in Washington.

It's not fair to the little people when someone can buy votes or influence decisions made by elected officials. They should go to jail.

You make the leap to corruption without showing the evidence. You got some?

Obviously this money will be donated to PACs with Global Warming being their "issue oriented"focus. If you don't like how that works, you can talk to John Roberts and Karl Rove about it.

But it's not illegal.

And your guys wrote the rules.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Both sides do it and it needs to stop, but I doubt it will...

The SCOTUS decides which cases it will hear, and which it will not.

They continue to reduce limitations on contributions, ruling again just recently to remove limits on campaign contributions.

Outside of a visible quid pro quo, the moneyed can do whever they want.

Saying "it needs to stop" is just pissing in the wind.

Campaign funding and this thing which is nothing more than a bribe, are two entirely separate things.
Your savior. Your Chosen One, has been ruling, yes ruling, not governing by political fiat.
"I have a pen. I have a phone."

 

[KNB]

Unlimited, untraceable campaign funding is different than legalized bribery? How?

 

[boilermaker55]

What surprises me is this is coming from someone like you.
Why aren't you saying that it is fine, because you know money gets votes and talks.
Seems corporations or billionaires on your side are the good guys and those on the progressives side are the boogie man.
Take some time and grow up and make a real statement.

How about it LIBS? Where are you on this?

 

[boilermaker55]

Exactly, they don't have enough integrity to admit that these are not mutually exclusive issues.
Until then they live in their dream land of them for them and the other rich people are abusing the system.
They will never get it.

Unlimited, untraceable campaign funding is different than legalized bribery? How?

 

[Impenitent]

Both sides do it and it needs to stop, but I doubt it will...

The SCOTUS decides which cases it will hear, and which it will not.

They continue to reduce limitations on contributions, ruling again just recently to remove limits on campaign contributions.

Outside of a visible quid pro quo, the moneyed can do whever they want.

Saying "it needs to stop" is just pissing in the wind.

Campaign funding and this thing which is nothing more than a bribe, are two entirely separate things.
Your savior. Your Chosen One, has been ruling, yes ruling, not governing by political fiat.
"I have a pen. I have a phone."

the op makes a connection between the postponement and the money that does not exist. In fact, the money does not yet exist.

It also fails to note the court case in Nebraska that can change the route of the pipeline. The environmental impact of the pipeline cannot be determined until this case is over.

And those farmers in Nebraska are fighting for their family farms in a more true sense than the Bundys are in Wyoming. And they aren't all Democrats either.

Imagine who the Bundys would be fighting if the pipeline went through their ranch.

 

[Impenitent]

And here I thought you were a left leaning liberal supporting a liberal democracy and not a leftist supporting... well you know.

If you'll provide an accurate scale from extreme right to leftist, I'll try to pinpoint my location for you!

I don't need to provide your position. You'll do that. I've just come back in and started reading the political section so I'll soon learn where you stand.

You didn't seem to mind the term 'leftist' and accepted it as if you are one and there is a clear delineation between the two so I wondered. Time will provide it.

I haven't made an impact in the political section, because a certain person has kept me tied up in the flame zone! Now, who do you think that would be?

 

[OKTexas]

Sorry, it's a quote. I can't change the spelling.

ii'm not talking about what you had in quotes?

Only one of us typed that intentionally.

You don't know how hard "thumbing it" is on an iphone. I have to fix a lot. I didn't consider ii'm to be worth the trouble!

I'm only guilty of being too lazy - not too stupid (this time.)

Just shows a phone is for making phone calls, otherwise they can make you look kind of dumb.

 

[Impenitent]

Unlimited, untraceable campaign funding is different than legalized bribery? How?

Four Democratic Supreme Court Justices agree with you.

 

[Ropey]

If you'll provide an accurate scale from extreme right to leftist, I'll try to pinpoint my location for you!

I don't need to provide your position. You'll do that. I've just come back in and started reading the political section so I'll soon learn where you stand.

You didn't seem to mind the term 'leftist' and accepted it as if you are one and there is a clear delineation between the two so I wondered. Time will provide it.

I haven't made an impact in the political section, because a certain person has kept me tied up in the flame zone! Now, who do you think that would be?

I wasn't even here when that was started up. Maybe you can keep your mind on the politics while you're not in there.

Anyway, back to the politics. IMO, the OP is much ado about nothing.

The Republicans have a greater grasp of the finances in the business sector while POTUS has the margins and they're losing the margin and youth vote as well as some minority votes.

I don't keep an eye on this money. I'm keeping an eye on the overall economy as it relates to the middle class. As it lowers, the Republicans chance of winning grows.

Time will tell this and your position.