turtlespeed 226 #1 October 15, 2010 The DNC's new ad . . . I would hope they have some evidence of this before they accuse people of this.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #2 October 15, 2010 QuoteThe DNC's new ad . . . I would hope they have some evidence of this before they accuse people of this. Funny I was thinking about that this morning. Some sort of clearing house ala Snopes that OK's the claims. I see politico adds anymore and think to myself '180 degrees in the opposite direction is probably closer to the truth'Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #3 October 15, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe DNC's new ad . . . I would hope they have some evidence of this before they accuse people of this. Funny I was thinking about that this morning. Some sort of clearing house ala Snopes that OK's the claims. I see politico adds anymore and think to myself '180 degrees in the opposite direction is probably closer to the truth' But who clears the clearing houses? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d_squared431 0 #4 October 16, 2010 Quote Quote Quote The DNC's new ad . . . I would hope they have some evidence of this before they accuse people of this. Funny I was thinking about that this morning. Some sort of clearing house ala Snopes that OK's the claims. I see politico adds anymore and think to myself '180 degrees in the opposite direction is probably closer to the truth' But who clears the clearing houses? Probably the people paying from other countries with foreign money...TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1 I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #5 October 16, 2010 I've wondered that myself. Especially in regard to the governor's race here in Texas. Both calling the other crooks and making claims of how one took bail-out money to pay his own debts and the other took money from big business and so-on. I don't hear either side calling the other a liar, either. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #6 October 16, 2010 QuoteI've wondered that myself. Especially in regard to the governor's race here in Texas. Both calling the other crooks and making claims of how one took bail-out money to pay his own debts and the other took money from big business and so-on. I don't hear either side calling the other a liar, either. Chuck Flores has called Edwards a liar, and rightly so. Edwards (because he approved the message) accused Flores of laying off 3000 workers, when in fact his responsibility with that company ended three years befor the merge. There were not 3000 jobs lost - there were about 3000 people that now worked for a different company name.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,173 #7 October 16, 2010 Well, let's see: Foreign organizations admit to paying money to the US Chamber of Commerce. From the AmCham website: ============= Frequently Asked Questions We are often asked questions concerning the activities and mission of AmCham, here we address some of those most frequently asked. 1. WHAT IS THE AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE – ABU DHABI? The American Chamber of Commerce - Abu Dhabi (AmCham) is a dues paying member of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and part of the global network of American Chambers of Commerce. ============== It is indeed illegal for foreign nationals to contribute to elections. From FactCheck.org: ========== The law not only forbids foreign nationals from making contributions, but also prohibits them from spending money in connection with an election, either directly or indirectly. It’s also illegal for anyone to receive such a contribution, to solicit one or to help a foreign national violate the prohibition. ========== The Chamber of Commerce has admitted they get foreign funding and that they are paying $75 million for political attack ads. But they refuse to disclose where the foreign money goes, other than "it doesn't go to political ads." Do they have to disclose it? Per Federal law: ========= FEC, AO 1992-16: The [U.S.] subsidiary must be able to demonstrate through a reasonable accounting method that it has sufficient funds in its account, other than funds given or loaned by its foreign national parent, from which the contribution is made. ========= So the ball's in their court. If they want to put this to bed, then they can disclose where the foreign funding goes, and demonstrate it's not going to the ads. If not, then it's reasonable to assume that if an entity gets lots of money from foreign corporations, and then spends million on political ads, that some of that foreign money is going to political ads. I think there are a lot of people shitting their pants in the Chamber of Commerce right about now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #8 October 17, 2010 QuoteThe DNC's new ad . . . I would hope they have some evidence of this before they accuse people of this. Can you identify what portion of the content you believe to be false? If one reads factual news content, and international news content, one knows that none of the content of the TV commercial can be proven to be factually wrong. Give it a go and report back for us. Details and cites as to the source of information that factually debunks the ad content would be good. PR postings on the USCOC's website doesn't count. Kinda sucks to be on the receiving end of this kind of public relations campaign for a change, doesn't it? It had to start happening. At least the DNC uses accurate info that can be verified. In other words, they haven't yet acheived the ability to lie shamelessly, as the the RWCs have. The USCOC has been taking foreign money donations, mixing it in with domestic donations, then taking advantage of the new rules of spending implemented by the psychotic Roberts court. The spending is on ads that will influence voters. The USCOC denied the facts, but their own financial statements make a lie of the denial. The USCOC is severely Right Wing Conservative. They are no friend at all to any person who pays FICA tax on 100% of their income. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 62 #9 October 17, 2010 QuoteI've wondered that myself. Especially in regard to the governor's race here in Texas. Both calling the other crooks and making claims of how one took bail-out money to pay his own debts and the other took money from big business and so-on. I don't hear either side calling the other a liar, either. Chuck Reminds me of the story that Lyndon B. Johnson once called his opponent a "pig fucker." His campaign manager said that was not fair because he couldn't prove it. Johnson's reply, "It doesn't matter. Make him deny it."Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #11 October 18, 2010 Quote Can you identify what portion of the content you believe to be false? Prove a negative? Sure as soon as you prove God doesn't exist.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #12 October 18, 2010 obuma has made these types of dishonest claims before , result... http://apnews.myway.com/article/20101016/D9ISQVK00.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #13 October 18, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe DNC's new ad . . . I would hope they have some evidence of this before they accuse people of this. Can you identify what portion of the content you believe to be false? If one reads factual news content, and international news content, one knows that none of the content of the TV commercial can be proven to be factually wrong. Give it a go and report back for us. Details and cites as to the source of information that factually debunks the ad content would be good. PR postings on the USCOC's website doesn't count. Kinda sucks to be on the receiving end of this kind of public relations campaign for a change, doesn't it? It had to start happening. At least the DNC uses accurate info that can be verified. In other words, they haven't yet acheived the ability to lie shamelessly, as the the RWCs have. The USCOC has been taking foreign money donations, mixing it in with domestic donations, then taking advantage of the new rules of spending implemented by the psychotic Roberts court. The spending is on ads that will influence voters. The USCOC denied the facts, but their own financial statements make a lie of the denial. The USCOC is severely Right Wing Conservative. They are no friend at all to any person who pays FICA tax on 100% of their income. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/us/politics/21money.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all]Try reading this article. Then imagine someone accusing you of money laundering, and they make a public address regarding that accusation. Prove you didn't do it. The simple fact is, they are doing nothing illegal. The unproven and unfounded accusations the DNC are making are unfounded and untrue. The rules are that they have to do less than 50% political lobbying. I will absolutely change my view if you can prove that they have violated that.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,173 #14 October 18, 2010 >Then imagine someone accusing you of money laundering, and they >make a public address regarding that accusation. If you owned a business, and were running for a public office, and was receiving lots of money from a business in China, and you supported pro-China initiatives - then yes, it would be completely valid to ask whether or not you had a vested interest. While Obama was running, republicans DID accuse him of the same thing. He returned the money. Will the GOP have that kind of integrity? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #15 October 18, 2010 Quote >Then imagine someone accusing you of money laundering, and they >make a public address regarding that accusation. If you owned a business, and were running for a public office, and was receiving lots of money from a business in China, and you supported pro-China initiatives - then yes, it would be completely valid to ask whether or not you had a vested interest. While Obama was running, republicans DID accuse him of the same thing. He returned the money. Will the GOP have that kind of integrity? Returning the money "after" your caught is your idea of "Integrity"?So Clinton showed integrity after he admitted, He did have sex with that woman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,173 #16 October 18, 2010 >Returning the money "after" your caught is your idea of "Integrity"? No, the highest form of integrity is not taking it at all. If you return it after being asked about it, that's not nearly as good - but is better than hanging on to it and refusing to answer questions about it. >So Clinton showed integrity after he admitted, He did have sex with >that woman.... He showed more integrity than he had before, that's for sure. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #17 October 18, 2010 Quote>Returning the money "after" your caught is your idea of "Integrity"? No, the highest form of integrity is not taking it at all. If you return it after being asked about it, that's not nearly as good - but is better than hanging on to it and refusing to answer questions about it. >So Clinton showed integrity after he admitted, He did have sex with >that woman.... He showed more integrity than he had before, that's for sure. Leaving Clinton aside - he isn't president and is not the topic of this discussion. If the Foriegn moiney doesn't equal more than half of the money donated, then there is no issue, other than a lie being told and propagated by the liberals. Unless you believe in guilt before proven innocent.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,173 #18 October 18, 2010 >Leaving Clinton aside - he isn't president and is not the topic of this >discussion. You'll have to take that up with Skyrider. >If the Foriegn moiney doesn't equal more than half of the money >donated, then there is no issue, other than a lie being told and propagated >by the liberals. The ad didn't claim that it was equal to more than half the money donated. They just said they have "taken foreign money." >Unless you believe in guilt before proven innocent. Nope. No one is claiming they are guilty of anything. If they don't like the ad, they shouldn't have accepted foreign money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #19 October 18, 2010 Quote>Leaving Clinton aside - he isn't president and is not the topic of this >discussion. You'll have to take that up with Skyrider. >If the Foriegn moiney doesn't equal more than half of the money >donated, then there is no issue, other than a lie being told and propagated >by the liberals. The ad didn't claim that it was equal to more than half the money donated. They just said they have "taken foreign money." >Unless you believe in guilt before proven innocent. Nope. No one is claiming they are guilty of anything. If they don't like the ad, they shouldn't have accepted foreign money. So you would be OK with the RNC doing the exact same ad with Pelosi and Reid and Obama as the main characters? If you think that tey don't accept foreign rewards for their efforts, you are pretty naive.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,173 #20 October 18, 2010 >So you would be OK with the RNC doing the exact same ad with >Pelosi and Reid and Obama as the main characters? Uh, dude, they made a stink about that exact issue. (And I noticed you remained quite mum during that whole affair.) It is a sad commentary on the lack of morality in politics that republicans have no problem supporting such attacks when made against opponents, but cry foul when the exact same tactic is used against them. ========== RNC to File FEC Complaint on Obama Fundraising Practices By Matthew Mosk A lawyer for the Republican National Committee today said the party will ask the Federal Election Commission to look into the source of thousands of small-dollar contributions to the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama. The RNC is alleging that the Obama campaign was so hungry for donations it "looked the other way" as contributions piled up from suspicious, and possibly even illegal foreign donors. "We believe that the American people should know first and foremost if foreign money is pouring into a presidential election," said RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross. ========== Obama’s Millions in Illegal Foreign Donations October 20, 2008 4:34 A.M. By Andy McCarthy As Barack Obama reaped a stunning $150 million in campaign donations in September, bringing his total to more than $600 million, new questions have arisen about the source of his amazing funding. By Obama’s own admission, more than half of his contributions have come from small donors giving $200 or less. But unlike John McCain’s campaign, Obama won’t release the names of these donors. A Newsmax canvass of disclosed Obama campaign donors shows worrisome anomalies, including outright violations of federal election laws. For example, Obama has numerous donors who have contributed well over the $4,600 federal election limit. Many of these donors have never been contacted by the Obama campaign to refund the excess amounts to them. And more than 37,000 Obama donations appear to be conversions of foreign currency. ================= Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #21 October 18, 2010 Quote>So you would be OK with the RNC doing the exact same ad with >Pelosi and Reid and Obama as the main characters? Uh, dude, they made a stink about that exact issue. (And I noticed you remained quite mum during that whole affair.) It is a sad commentary on the lack of morality in politics that republicans have no problem supporting such attacks when made against opponents, but cry foul when the exact same tactic is used against them. ========== RNC to File FEC Complaint on Obama Fundraising Practices By Matthew Mosk A lawyer for the Republican National Committee today said the party will ask the Federal Election Commission to look into the source of thousands of small-dollar contributions to the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama. The RNC is alleging that the Obama campaign was so hungry for donations it "looked the other way" as contributions piled up from suspicious, and possibly even illegal foreign donors. "We believe that the American people should know first and foremost if foreign money is pouring into a presidential election," said RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross. ========== Obama’s Millions in Illegal Foreign Donations October 20, 2008 4:34 A.M. By Andy McCarthy As Barack Obama reaped a stunning $150 million in campaign donations in September, bringing his total to more than $600 million, new questions have arisen about the source of his amazing funding. By Obama’s own admission, more than half of his contributions have come from small donors giving $200 or less. But unlike John McCain’s campaign, Obama won’t release the names of these donors. A Newsmax canvass of disclosed Obama campaign donors shows worrisome anomalies, including outright violations of federal election laws. For example, Obama has numerous donors who have contributed well over the $4,600 federal election limit. Many of these donors have never been contacted by the Obama campaign to refund the excess amounts to them. And more than 37,000 Obama donations appear to be conversions of foreign currency. ================= Perhapos you can show the political ad where that is one of the main talking points? As to why I didn't comment - look back to my speakers corner postings during that time - and ee how many I was making.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #22 October 18, 2010 QuoteI think there are a lot of people shitting their pants in the Chamber of Commerce right about now. I don't. QuoteDemocratic leaders in the House and Senate alleging GOP groups have funneled foreign money into campaign ads have seen their party raise more than $1 million from political action committees affiliated with foreign companies. House and Senate Democrats have received about $1.02 million this cycle from such PACs, according to an analysis compiled for The Hill by the Center for Responsive Politics. House and Senate GOP leaders have taken almost $510,000 from PACs on the same list.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #23 October 22, 2010 QuoteQuote Can you identify what portion of the content you believe to be false? Prove a negative? Sure as soon as you prove God doesn't exist. In other words, in your opinion, the content is untue, but can't come up with any facts to support your OPINION. There are plenty of individual facts available that show each point of the advertiment to be true. The summary of the facts = the USCOC is spending foreign donations on advertisments in support of Republican candidates. That is against US law. The folks responsible should be held accountable. RWCs have strong opinions that usually have little to no basis in fact. Here is yet another case of that rearing it's ugly head. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #24 October 22, 2010 foreign contributions ? to the dems ? by companies who take unfair advantage of tax law to cheat on taxes , say hey...http://politics.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/07/02/high-tech-industry-gives-more-money-to-democrats.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #25 October 22, 2010 So a quick recap of the last 7 posts..... Foreigners donated so much to Obama that he broke the law and had to give it back. Foreigners haven't donated enough to the Chamber of Commerce to be considered illegal yet. Now I know why the left is so mad. "There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
