The People That McCain Owes Alegence To Is John McCain in the pocket of oil companies? Is John McCain in the pocket of insurance companies? Is john McCain in the pocket of pharmaceutical companies? Is McCain in the pocket of the mortgage companies? Is McCain in the pocket of the banking industry? Here is a list of lobbyists and employees of major companies working in major positions in the McCain campaign. It will answer any questions you might have about the people who are advising and influencing him. http://mccainsource.com/corruption?id=0006
Amanda
· 1 year ago
American "Big Oil" currently controls 3% of the world's oil supply. It is preposterous to suggest that Exxon/Mobil is manipulating the cost of fuel to American families. 97% of "Big Oil's" profits are winding up in the 401k accounts of average American share holders and it's the only silver lining in sight because the bottom is about to fall out of the "Big Government" bureaucracy commonly known as Social Security.
Pelosi and liberal Democrats are threatening to STEAL the profits of "Big Oil" (a.k.a. Joe American's 401k account), ranting and raving about their huge profits, but what they are conveniently omitting from the discussion is how these profits compare to those of other successful businesses.
The profits of "Big Oil" are actually pretty modest if you fairly figure in the cost of doing business and compare the 'actual' profits to those of other industries. The only industry that is subject to the type of taxation that liberal Democrats are talking about is the pornography industry.
Get your heads out of the sand people. Liberal Democrats in Congress have done absolutely nothing but piddle away their time and our tax dollars by passing more than 1200 "symbolic" resolutions during their fruitless time in our Congressional Halls. The latest and greatest waste of time and resources coming from our Democratic controlled Congress...declaring a National Watermellon Month!!! Try as one might, one cannot blame the Bush Administration for this debauchery.
Sarah Palin clearly has a level head and will be an aggressive advocate for the right to use the abundance of natural resources available in Alaska. Perhaps some need a refresher course in American History 101. Secretary of State, William Seward, purchased Alaska in 1867 with the specific intent of obtaing the natural resources found there.
Al Gore and the EPA have created a sea of red tape that ties the hands of "we the people" and forbids us from making use of our investment. We've had one pipeline in Alaska for 3 decades with zero incidents of catastrophy happening there. The site in question in ANWR is a waste land and Governor Palin has said as much herself. The polar bears are not dying either. The slightest bit of self-induced research will reveal that this is a brazen lie and the polar bear population in the Arctic has steadily been growing. Al Gore and the EPA are making half of complacent America look like mindless fools by propagating mass hysteria via the myth of man made global warming.
Rayne1
· 1 year ago
Okay, Amanda, we get it, you've been given your marching orders to "spam" us. You're pretty prolific, pumping out a handful of comments here in a very short time, and all of them with nicely prepared rhetoric.
I see you did take the time to read the McCainSource info the previous commenter left here -- care to respond to the issue of McCain having 134+ lobbyists working for him?
Amanda
· 1 year ago
Huh? Marching orders to spam you? I am a private citizen, a Christian Conservative, responding to a public internet blog, who doesn't happen to agree with your view point. If you only wanted those with like minded opinions to respond why didn't you just say so? I am more than happy to respond to your accusations regarding lobbyists:
Behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.
In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.
Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall. Clinton's Senate committee, by comparison, has raised $3 million from PACs, 4 percent of her total amount raised, the group said.
In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data. Obama then used those PAC contributions -- including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries -- to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.
Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that after seeing the influence of lobbyists firsthand during his two years in Washington, Obama decided before he entered the presidential race that he would take a different approach to fund-raising than he had in the past.
"He's leading by example and taking steps that he feels need to be taken on the national stage to clean up the undue influence of Washington lobbyists on the policies and priorities of Washington," Psaki said. "His leadership on this issue is an evolving process."
Psaki said Obama believes that healthcare lobbyists have blocked progress toward universal health coverage, and that oil company lobbyists have blocked badly needed changes to America's energy policies.
Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in February, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists and lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first six months of 2007. Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.
This activity, along with Obama's past contributions from lobbyists and PACs, has drawn fire from opposing campaigns. Some political analysts say Obama, by casting himself as an uncorrupted good-government crusader, has set himself up for charges of hypocrisy.
"If you're running a campaign about credibility, that credibility and persona are so important you better be squeaky clean," said Richard Semiatin, a political scientist at American University. "While he's getting good traction out of this, I think in the long term he's really got to be careful."
From the day he entered the presidential race, Obama has projected an outside-the-Beltway persona, positioning himself as the Washington change agent that Americans are pining for. Last week, his campaign began running a new TV spot in Iowa, in which the narrator says, "He's leading by example, refusing contributions from PACs and Washington lobbyists who have too much power today."
In the Democrats' previous debate, on July 23, Obama was unequivocal when challenged by former Alaska senator Mike Gravel about who his donors were.
"Well, the fact is I don't take PAC money and I don't take lobbyists' money," Obama said, touting his work on an ethics reform bill that just passed Congress. "That's the kind of leadership that I've shown in the Senate. That's the kind of leadership that I showed when I was a state legislator. And that's the kind of leadership that I'll show as president of the United States."
And on June 25, right before the second quarter ended, Obama sent an e-mail to supporters asking them to contribute to his campaign to make up for the lack of special-interest money.
"Candidates typically spend a week like this -- right before the critical June 30th financial reporting deadline -- on the phone day and night, begging Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs to write huge checks," the e-mail said. "Not me. Our campaign has rejected the money-for-influence game and refused to accept funds from registered federal lobbyists and political action committees."
Obama's main Democratic target on the issue of lobbyist and PAC contributions has been Clinton, whom Obama has been working to paint as a figurehead for the broken politics of Washington. Through June, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Clinton had collected $413,000 from lobbyists and $533,000 from PACs -- leading all 2008 presidential contenders in both categories. Clinton has also raised about $3 million from PACs and $400,000 from lobbyists for her Senate campaigns, according to the group.
Clinton's campaign declined to comment.
Peverill Squire, a political scientist at the University of Iowa, said Obama, given his record of raising special-interest money throughout his political career, was taking a "gamble" in holding himself up as a beacon of purity.
"He probably will be hurt if he's put in a position where he's trying to draw very fine distinctions between his present campaign and his past behavior," Squire said.
Obama's campaign is relying almost exclusively on an unprecedented network of grass-roots donors and activists -- nearly 260,000 of them had given him money through June alone.
And some good-government activists say that, past fund-raising practices aside, Obama has genuinely been a champion for ethics and campaign reform, both in the Illinois Legislature and in Congress.
"On the one hand, sure, he rose to power as many people do in this town, which is to raise money from the people who have the money," said Gary Kalman, of the advocacy group US PIRG.
At the same time, he added, Obama has championed public financing for elections and he fought hard to pass the federal ethics reform bill.
Barack and Michelle Obama are really Bill and Hilliry Clinton, without the hormone problems.
The corruption of Barack Obama is astounding. This article is about how he funneled campaign money to the corrupt organization, ACORN. Many of its chapters have been found involved in voter and registration fraud—and Obama gave them his campaign money to register voters, and tried to hide it. Now he is "amending" his reports.
Acorn is also being investigated for misusing millions in Federal housing money.
Evidence has just come to light how Barack hired known radical, Maoists and marxists to "reform" Chicago schools. The good news is that he was hired for the job by an unrepentant bomb trowing terrorist, his good friend, Bill Ayres—more about that on another day.
Did some Republican plan to kill off Hillary so Barack could be the nominee, to make sure McCain won in November? This guy bought property with a mobbed up crook, mentored by a bigot, friends with terrorists, how can McCain lose?
All Comments
Is John McCain in the pocket of oil companies?
Is John McCain in the pocket of insurance companies?
Is john McCain in the pocket of pharmaceutical companies?
Is McCain in the pocket of the mortgage companies?
Is McCain in the pocket of the banking industry?
Here is a list of lobbyists and employees of major companies working in major positions in the McCain campaign. It will answer any questions you might have about the people who are advising and influencing him.
http://mccainsource.com/corruption?id=0006
Pelosi and liberal Democrats are threatening to STEAL the profits of "Big Oil" (a.k.a. Joe American's 401k account), ranting and raving about their huge profits, but what they are conveniently omitting from the discussion is how these profits compare to those of other successful businesses.
The profits of "Big Oil" are actually pretty modest if you fairly figure in the cost of doing business and compare the 'actual' profits to those of other industries. The only industry that is subject to the type of taxation that liberal Democrats are talking about is the pornography industry.
Get your heads out of the sand people. Liberal Democrats in Congress have done absolutely nothing but piddle away their time and our tax dollars by passing more than 1200 "symbolic" resolutions during their fruitless time in our Congressional Halls. The latest and greatest waste of time and resources coming from our Democratic controlled Congress...declaring a National Watermellon Month!!! Try as one might, one cannot blame the Bush Administration for this debauchery.
Sarah Palin clearly has a level head and will be an aggressive advocate for the right to use the abundance of natural resources available in Alaska. Perhaps some need a refresher course in American History 101. Secretary of State, William Seward, purchased Alaska in 1867 with the specific intent of obtaing the natural resources found there.
Al Gore and the EPA have created a sea of red tape that ties the hands of "we the people" and forbids us from making use of our investment. We've had one pipeline in Alaska for 3 decades with zero incidents of catastrophy happening there. The site in question in ANWR is a waste land and Governor Palin has said as much herself. The polar bears are not dying either. The slightest bit of self-induced research will reveal that this is a brazen lie and the polar bear population in the Arctic has steadily been growing. Al Gore and the EPA are making half of complacent America look like mindless fools by propagating mass hysteria via the myth of man made global warming.
I see you did take the time to read the McCainSource info the previous commenter left here -- care to respond to the issue of McCain having 134+ lobbyists working for him?
Behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.
In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.
Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall. Clinton's Senate committee, by comparison, has raised $3 million from PACs, 4 percent of her total amount raised, the group said.
In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data. Obama then used those PAC contributions -- including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries -- to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.
Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that after seeing the influence of lobbyists firsthand during his two years in Washington, Obama decided before he entered the presidential race that he would take a different approach to fund-raising than he had in the past.
"He's leading by example and taking steps that he feels need to be taken on the national stage to clean up the undue influence of Washington lobbyists on the policies and priorities of Washington," Psaki said. "His leadership on this issue is an evolving process."
Psaki said Obama believes that healthcare lobbyists have blocked progress toward universal health coverage, and that oil company lobbyists have blocked badly needed changes to America's energy policies.
Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in February, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists and lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first six months of 2007. Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.
This activity, along with Obama's past contributions from lobbyists and PACs, has drawn fire from opposing campaigns. Some political analysts say Obama, by casting himself as an uncorrupted good-government crusader, has set himself up for charges of hypocrisy.
"If you're running a campaign about credibility, that credibility and persona are so important you better be squeaky clean," said Richard Semiatin, a political scientist at American University. "While he's getting good traction out of this, I think in the long term he's really got to be careful."
From the day he entered the presidential race, Obama has projected an outside-the-Beltway persona, positioning himself as the Washington change agent that Americans are pining for. Last week, his campaign began running a new TV spot in Iowa, in which the narrator says, "He's leading by example, refusing contributions from PACs and Washington lobbyists who have too much power today."
In the Democrats' previous debate, on July 23, Obama was unequivocal when challenged by former Alaska senator Mike Gravel about who his donors were.
"Well, the fact is I don't take PAC money and I don't take lobbyists' money," Obama said, touting his work on an ethics reform bill that just passed Congress. "That's the kind of leadership that I've shown in the Senate. That's the kind of leadership that I showed when I was a state legislator. And that's the kind of leadership that I'll show as president of the United States."
And on June 25, right before the second quarter ended, Obama sent an e-mail to supporters asking them to contribute to his campaign to make up for the lack of special-interest money.
"Candidates typically spend a week like this -- right before the critical June 30th financial reporting deadline -- on the phone day and night, begging Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs to write huge checks," the e-mail said. "Not me. Our campaign has rejected the money-for-influence game and refused to accept funds from registered federal lobbyists and political action committees."
Obama's main Democratic target on the issue of lobbyist and PAC contributions has been Clinton, whom Obama has been working to paint as a figurehead for the broken politics of Washington. Through June, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Clinton had collected $413,000 from lobbyists and $533,000 from PACs -- leading all 2008 presidential contenders in both categories. Clinton has also raised about $3 million from PACs and $400,000 from lobbyists for her Senate campaigns, according to the group.
Clinton's campaign declined to comment.
Peverill Squire, a political scientist at the University of Iowa, said Obama, given his record of raising special-interest money throughout his political career, was taking a "gamble" in holding himself up as a beacon of purity.
"He probably will be hurt if he's put in a position where he's trying to draw very fine distinctions between his present campaign and his past behavior," Squire said.
Obama's campaign is relying almost exclusively on an unprecedented network of grass-roots donors and activists -- nearly 260,000 of them had given him money through June alone.
And some good-government activists say that, past fund-raising practices aside, Obama has genuinely been a champion for ethics and campaign reform, both in the Illinois Legislature and in Congress.
"On the one hand, sure, he rose to power as many people do in this town, which is to raise money from the people who have the money," said Gary Kalman, of the advocacy group US PIRG.
At the same time, he added, Obama has championed public financing for elections and he fought hard to pass the federal ethics reform bill.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007...
The corruption of Barack Obama is astounding. This article is about how he funneled campaign money to the corrupt organization, ACORN. Many of its chapters have been found involved in voter and registration fraud—and Obama gave them his campaign money to register voters, and tried to hide it. Now he is "amending" his reports.
Acorn is also being investigated for misusing millions in Federal housing money.
Evidence has just come to light how Barack hired known radical, Maoists and marxists to "reform" Chicago schools. The good news is that he was hired for the job by an unrepentant bomb trowing terrorist, his good friend, Bill Ayres—more about that on another day.
Did some Republican plan to kill off Hillary so Barack could be the nominee, to make sure McCain won in November? This guy bought property with a mobbed up crook, mentored by a bigot, friends with terrorists, how can McCain lose?
To see the complete story click on the URL below.
http://capoliticalnews.com/s/spip.php?article854
Nancy Pelosy MUST step down