June 17, 201016 yr Where did all of Obama's money come from? Oh wait, that's right, the most transparent president in history refused public funding (and limits) and won't disclose his donor list. Face it, Obama bought this election. That's no more of a stretch then the lefties that still think GWB stole the 2000 election
June 17, 201016 yr Gotcha. The implication made by History is that the corporation gave him money and he's beholden to them as a result. In fact, it was individual employees OF BP who gave the money. That's hardly the same. Again, $71k didn't cover his copying expense for a month. What is more to History's point is that the oil and gas industry gave $2.4M to Sen. McCain and gave then Sen. Obama $900k. Clyde I know you are one to take opposite positions just because, but certainly $71, 000 gives you access. This whole situation allows Obama to attempt his strategy of blame the big bad corporations, and then take them over. A simple way to collect more revenue.
June 17, 201016 yr :lol: The UnMajority is a place I'm quite familiar with. As to the election, I'm not particularly enthused by either candidate at this point, sadly. I was on the Conway bandwagon for a while, but I'm back to walking on the road trying to find a reason to vote for either candidate. Plus, Conway has that dreadful letter after his name.....X. I hope in Kentucky you remain in the minority. We can't afford the liberal spending agenda.
June 17, 201016 yr Clyde I know you are one to take opposite positions just because, but certainly $71, 000 gives you access. This whole situation allows Obama to attempt his strategy of blame the big bad corporations, and then take them over. A simple way to collect more revenue. The statement above tells me that you don't fully understand the reports you've been hearing. The $71k came not from "the corporation" but from many individuals who work for the corporation. If I worked for BP and gave $50 and you gave $100 and All Tell gave $200 why do you think that would get BP any access? Its asinine.
June 17, 201016 yr I hope in Kentucky you remain in the minority. We can't afford the liberal spending agenda. I haven't seen too much difference between the "liberal spending agenda" and the "conservative spending agenda" over the past decade or so.
June 17, 201016 yr The statement above tells me that you don't fully understand the reports you've been hearing. The $71k came not from "the corporation" but from many individuals who work for the corporation. If I worked for BP and gave $50 and you gave $100 and All Tell gave $200 why do you think that would get BP any access? Its asinine. How would they link the contributions to a company Clyde and not the individual? The individuals and corporations are looking for tax write offs. You need to stop reading the left wing tear sheets. Think for yourself.
June 17, 201016 yr I haven't seen too much difference between the "liberal spending agenda" and the "conservative spending agenda" over the past decade or so. While you are quite right the "conservatives" under Bush spent way too much, it is small compared to what Obama is blowing.
June 17, 201016 yr How would they link the contributions to a company Clyde and not the individual? The individuals and corporations are looking for tax write offs. You need to stop reading the left wing tear sheets. Think for yourself. Here's the list. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/search.php?cid=N00009638&name=&employ=bp&state=(all)&zip=(any+zip)&submit=OK&amt=a&sort=A BP doesn't even come close to others. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
June 17, 201016 yr And again I ask why did they list the corporation they worked for-no purpose? Do you contribute to any candidate? And if you do, do you list whom you are employed by. I have never listed that unless I was pressured by the organization to do so-so that they can get a write off or credit.
June 17, 201016 yr While you are quite right the "conservatives" under Bush spent way too much, it is small compared to what Obama is blowing. But you have to admit the circumstances are quite different.
June 17, 201016 yr I haven't seen too much difference between the "liberal spending agenda" and the "conservative spending agenda" over the past decade or so. One of the most bi-partisan areas there is!
June 17, 201016 yr And again I ask why did they list the corporation they worked for-no purpose? Do you contribute to any candidate? And if you do, do you list whom you are employed by. I have never listed that unless I was pressured by the organization to do so-so that they can get a write off or credit. You're losing me. You first claim that the reports prove that BP is the biggest contributor to President Obama. I then point out that's not the case. Your argument then goes to "it can't be accurate because...." Which one do you want to use? Pick one and we can then debate.
June 17, 201016 yr In my mind Rand Paul and his "offbeat" notions have much less potential to harm us if he becomes a Senator then do what unabashed liberal Jack Conway could do as a Senator in the majority party. While I would have preferred Trey Grayson, Rand Paul will get my vote in November. In the meantime I'll watch the democratically controlled Courier Journal do everything it can to deliver the election to Conway.
June 17, 201016 yr In my mind Rand Paul and his "offbeat" notions have much less potential to harm us if he becomes a Senator then do what unabashed liberal Jack Conway could do as a Senator in the majority party. While I would have preferred Trey Grayson, Rand Paul will get my vote in November. In the meantime I'll watch the democratically controlled Courier Journal do everything it can to deliver the election to Conway. What specifically do you see as detrimental about Conway, aside from him simply being a democrat?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.