Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  2 3 4 5 6  Next ›  Last »  (14 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steve Rockett
01:33 AM on 04/20/2011
If politicians were given money based on their IQs, the regressives would remain broke. The NRC is broke and lots of their newly elected Congressional representatives have gigantic debts. The big corporations do not like any of the presidential contenders and they are smart enough to not back the ridiculous, racist, anti-American regressives. This is why the tea gaggers are desperate to get some legislation passed before 2012. They are complete and utter failures.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lovetolast
Think and wonder. Wonder and think.
02:07 AM on 04/20/2011
Well said!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steve Rockett
01:24 AM on 04/20/2011
Every single person and corporation here and abroad should have to report any campaign contributions. Then after the report, everytime any legislation is voted upon by anyone in Congress who voted for it should be reported. Every lobbyist meeting between a Congressman and a contributor should be reported. I want the damned Congress held accountable to all Americans.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mummblemouth
Liberals: the only true fiscal conservatives.
07:07 AM on 04/20/2011
More than reported, any meeting between lobbyists and elected officials should be part of the public record, and if they're caught meeting off the record they should automatically be booted from the seat. Enough of this BS.
01:19 AM on 04/20/2011
http://fairelectionsnow.org/ We should just take the money out of the process so nobody can even try to buy our elected officials and they can stop spending half their time raising money and use it working.
photo
VoteBlago 2012
My favorite animal is a peacock
12:50 AM on 04/20/2011
isnt this the guy who said he was going to take federal matching funds then ditch that idea
photo
SirSlappy
My micro-bio is still empty.
07:28 AM on 04/20/2011
He also said the word "change" alot, then conveniently forgot about it after election day.
12:41 AM on 04/20/2011
Will BO insure unions do the same? Obviously not.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
oldngrumpy
My micro-bio is no longer empty
12:58 AM on 04/20/2011
I assume the talking point for this issue is the union angle, since it's only popped up about 50 times already. You guys need to work in shifts or schedule your posts so you don't look even more like a cluster.
01:07 AM on 04/20/2011
I am a contractor, and this is only FAIR. The unions do not make a profit from government contracts, like contactors do. So you are talking apples and oranges (as usual)
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
oldngrumpy
My micro-bio is no longer empty
01:10 AM on 04/20/2011
Not to mention that it's a straw man to begin with, as it is illegal for unions to donate dues money to political campaigns. They collect "VOLUNTARY" donations from members to PAC's.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
georgeny
12:38 AM on 04/20/2011
Are you sure that the Democrats tried, really tried, with all their selflessness, but just couldn't manage to "push through" an election transparency act last fall? Didn't they have commanding majorities in the house, senate and control of the executive, but just couldn't manage to get an "election transparency act" through? Give us a break.
photo
drwtsn
Could I please get an upgrade to a macro-bio?
12:58 AM on 04/20/2011
Didn't you read the article?
"the election transparency law Democrats tried to push through Congress last fall. Under that bill, which fell one vote short of a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate"
There was a very short time span when they had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and with DINOs like Nelson of Nebraska, even that was iffy. If any Republicans had voted in favor of their constituents rather than the contractors, it would have passed.
01:08 AM on 04/20/2011
Of course it would have made it through if the republicans weren't so good at obstruction.
12:36 AM on 04/20/2011
All Obama cares about is 2012, not the economy or jobs.
01:04 AM on 04/20/2011
At least your avatar is accurate.... keep on drinking.....
photo
ron2win
Mainely a conservative in Maine !
06:27 AM on 04/20/2011
It's a reflection of whom he/she is talking to.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
msgirlintn
Magnolia's mom!
12:34 AM on 04/20/2011
I'm not a Dr. Phil fan, but I do like his quote "Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing".  You just have to stop and ask yourself why the tea bagger Repubs are against transparency and knowing who is funding campaigns!  It's all quite clear.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steve Rockett
01:29 AM on 04/20/2011
Any sane person would ask why a group that calls itself a "party" is not registered as one. They pretend to know history, but they haven't a clue. They have seized an opportunity that evil has wanted since the founding of this country and that is to break the back of this nation. They hide behind the flag and Christianity, but their true masters are the greenbacks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FL TallMan
Disabled Vietnam Vet
12:33 AM on 04/20/2011
Politicians say they cannot compete without funding. So, let's allow unlimited political donations. Yep, unlimited, with stipulations:
- donations are made to a general campaign fund and NOT to a particular candidate,
- donations are handed out equally to candidates in proportions related to population in their districts,
- the FEC handles all donations and disbursements, and retains a percentage of the totals to pay for administration,

A system such as this will eliminate special favors. Each politician gets a share equal to his/her competition, yet there is no favors to return because the money is anonymous (to the candidate) and not given directly to the candidates, but to the general fund.

Maybe not perfect, but is a great deal better than the benefactor system we have now.
01:10 AM on 04/20/2011
Take money out of elections is a better solution. The Fair Elections Act is a step in the right direction. http://fairelectionsnow.org/ As long as it's all about money, our politicians will continue to be bought and paid for.
12:26 AM on 04/20/2011
We'll see now that the FEC is investigating baraks political contributions in 2008, focusing on FOREIGN $$$$$
fishin4u
Thats the bottom line 'cause fish says so
12:28 AM on 04/20/2011
Right on target!
#2 FISH............
01:10 AM on 04/20/2011
Investigating is not convicting. Does the GOP really want to talk about FOREIGN $$$$$... I doubt it.
fishin4u
Thats the bottom line 'cause fish says so
12:23 AM on 04/20/2011
My, this certainly politics as usual.
Given that this admin. has spent close to 4 million to correct violations being investigated by the FEC, not that you would have read it here.
You will see more details very soon...............

FISH..............
01:18 AM on 04/20/2011
McCain - who didn't raise as much money - has spent close to 2 million. It's part of the process because they all have to play catch-up to some degree with screening who contributed and returning money deemed illegal or inappropriate.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ken Greve
baja-ken
12:22 AM on 04/20/2011
How about this?
Starting at the state level any one running for office get's x amount of money for there run. Only money can come from a fellow voter. And all the money is with the names from were it came.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sak
12:20 AM on 04/20/2011
Until the campaign contribution laws are changed, we will have pressure from the very industries that should be regulated. Rather than protect the people, Congress will continue to protect those who are killing us with pollution or those who give away our jobs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CubnKira
12:19 AM on 04/20/2011
The three corporations that have been in the news most negatively, BP, Goldman Sachs, and GE were all heavy hitters for Obama. The time when the corporations gave almost exclusively to Repubs. is long gone. Obama took a lot of corporate donations and of course, Immelt, the Job Czar from GE, who paid no taxes, gave plenty to Obama.
photo
drwtsn
Could I please get an upgrade to a macro-bio?
12:45 AM on 04/20/2011
With their record profits, corporations can afford to buy politicians from both parties, and do.
Of course, it makes more sense to support a candidate who is going to win than one who is going to lose. Anyone with any brains knew McCain didn't have a chance, but I bet he still got mucho corporate bucks.
01:12 AM on 04/20/2011
Yea, so we REALLY need public financing of campaigns now more than ever.
11:54 PM on 04/19/2011
I find it hard to believe this doesn't ALREADY EXIST!