Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama: 'We cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:44 AM
Original message
Obama: 'We cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy"
Edited on Sat Aug-21-10 08:45 AM by jefferson_dem
Obama: 'We cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy'

President Obama criticized Republicans on Saturday for blocking a law that would force the backers of political "attack ads" to disclose who is paying for them.

"This can only mean that the leaders of the other party want to keep the public in the dark," Obama said in his Saturday radio address. "They don't want you to know which interests are paying for the ads. The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in a statement that the Obama-backed bill is designed to help Democrats in the fall elections: "Americans want us to focus on jobs, but by focusing on an election bill, Democrats are sending a clear message to the American people that their jobs aren't as important as the jobs of embattled Democrat politicians."

In the Republican radio address, U.S. Rep. Charles Djou, R-Hawaii, protested the rise of the federal debt.

"For every problem facing our nation, the answer from Washington has been to spend and spend, and -- if that doesn't work -- spend some more," Djou said.

Here is the text of Obama's address:

As the political season heats up, Americans are already being inundated with the usual phone calls, mailings and TV ads from campaigns all across the country. But this summer, they're also seeing a flood of attack ads run by shadowy groups with harmless-sounding names. We don't know who's behind these ads and we don't know who's paying for them.

The reason this is happening is because of a decision by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case -- a decision that now allows big corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence our elections. They can buy millions of dollars' worth of TV ads -- and worst of all, they don't even have to reveal who is actually paying for them. You don't know if it's a foreign-controlled corporation. You don't know if it's BP. You don't know if it's a big insurance company or a Wall Street Bank. A group can hide behind a phony name like "Citizens for a Better Future," even if a more accurate name would be "Corporations for Weaker Oversight."

We tried to fix this last month. There was a proposal supported by Democrats and Republicans that would've required corporate political advertisers to reveal who's funding their activities. When special interests take to the airwaves, whoever is running and funding the ad would have to appear in the advertisement and take responsibility for it -- like a company's CEO or an organization's biggest contributor. And foreign-controlled corporations and entities would be restricted from spending money to influence American elections -- just as they were in the past.

You would think that making these reforms would be a matter of common sense. You'd think that reducing corporate and even foreign influence over our elections wouldn't be a partisan issue.

But the Republican leaders in Congress said no. In fact, they used their power to block the issue from even coming up for a vote.

This can only mean that the leaders of the other party want to keep the public in the dark. They don't want you to know which interests are paying for the ads. The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.

Well, we cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy. So we're going to continue to fight for reform and transparency. And I urge all of you to take up the same fight. Let's challenge every elected official who benefits from these ads to defend this practice or join us in stopping it.

At a time of such challenge for America, we can't afford these political games. Millions of Americans are struggling to get by, and their voices shouldn't be drowned out by millions of dollars in secret, special-interest advertising. Their voices should be heard.

Let's not forget that a century ago, it was a Republican president -- Teddy Roosevelt -- who first tried to tackle the issue of corporate influence on our elections. He actually called it "one of the principal sources of corruption in our political affairs." And he proposed strict limits on corporate influence in elections. "Every special interest is entitled to justice," he said, "but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench or to representation in any public office."

We now face a similar challenge, and a similar opportunity to prevent special interests from gaining even more clout in Washington. This shouldn't be a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. This is an issue that goes to whether or not we will have a democracy that works for ordinary Americans -- a government of, by and for the people. Let's show the cynics and the special interests that we still can.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/08/obama-we-cannot-allow-the-coporate-takeover-of-our-democracy/1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
katandmoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
1. Too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
36. How is transparency too late?
It's never too late for transparency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katandmoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. It is as far as this shades-permanently-pulled-down administration is concerned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Big Blue Marble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
2. Too late,
it has already happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
13. Too Late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
16. Yes, too late to "save" but Never too late to reverse/restore democracy
the march of the centuries still favors democracy, even if the temptation to usurp it is powerful
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
3. About 35 years too late for that.....
nt


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. Is he serious. Its already been taken over.. and the health insurance debacle
and the bp/ gulf ecological disaster, I believe the Dems have done much to insulate the corporate institutions just as much as the Republicans..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Really?
So how does that conclusion jibe with the policy at issue in his remarks - corporate financing of elections... which the Dems want to stop but the Reps adore?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-10 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
43. Like the Republicons promising to outlaw abortion
They never did, they never will, they never intended to do so. They just want their contributors and throngs of the hoodwinked to believe they want to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I agree with health insurance, but BP?
Care to explain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
37. Yes, Mr. Buc stops here, is lying to the American people. If you don't live on the Gulf, then you
probably think all is ok and the shrimp is good and the oil is gone. The govt is lying and the criminals are in charge of the crime scene.. AND "clean up" crews are expecting to be done by this December.. meanwhile reality is this shit is stuck in our ecosystem for at least 20 to 30 yrs. the chemicals bio-accumulate, the tar balls keep awashing ashore, and the anoixic zones are still killing fish.. Oh and the big test for fish/ shrimp, smelling for chemicals. Do you want to eat a "smell test" or would you like real tests.

Meanwhile, reports are still coming in about plumes being found near the site (some saying its not closed or leaks are still occurring), the air and rain fallout contains some components that are worrysome.. and no one but a few independant groups are even testing the rain water or air.

People are still getting sick in the most effected areas and corexit is being dumped during night raids.

But the media, govt, and bp are telling everyone to move on. Nothing to see here. Faster than the Katrina coverage this has moved out of the main stream. Just today MS shrimpers are refusing to shrimp because they aren't stupid... or wanting to send out seafood that will sicken the rest of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smarmie Doofus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
7. yeah, yeah, "too late"; however........
>>>>Obama: 'We cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy'>>>>



this is the first thing he's said or done in a long time that I am in unambiguous agreement with.

He said the words. He's framing the issue. And it's a BIG issue. Bigger than big, actually, since it impacts everything else.



So let's hope it resonates. Let's hope the $$ media reports it.


Let's hope Gibbs doesn't come to the podium on Monday with a "clarification".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZM90 Donating Member (56 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
8. Another example of how the obstructionist republicons are trying to
destroy the United States. Bush got it 75% of the way there and now the rest of the party of no wants to finish the job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
9. Huh.
Yeah, good job with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fogonthelake Donating Member (198 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
10. They already have Mr. President. In addition, You and some Democrats
have contributed to the takeover by wooing them into the health insurance 'reform' game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. I guess I understand the pavlovian reaction to the headline but please read the context.
within which he makes the statement. See what's pasted below.

I hope you appreciate the disntinction between the President and his party and those on the other side ... on this issue (if nothing else).

The reason this is happening is because of a decision by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case -- a decision that now allows big corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence our elections. They can buy millions of dollars' worth of TV ads -- and worst of all, they don't even have to reveal who is actually paying for them. You don't know if it's a foreign-controlled corporation. You don't know if it's BP. You don't know if it's a big insurance company or a Wall Street Bank. A group can hide behind a phony name like "Citizens for a Better Future," even if a more accurate name would be "Corporations for Weaker Oversight."

We tried to fix this last month. There was a proposal supported by Democrats and Republicans that would've required corporate political advertisers to reveal who's funding their activities. When special interests take to the airwaves, whoever is running and funding the ad would have to appear in the advertisement and take responsibility for it -- like a company's CEO or an organization's biggest contributor. And foreign-controlled corporations and entities would be restricted from spending money to influence American elections -- just as they were in the past.

You would think that making these reforms would be a matter of common sense. You'd think that reducing corporate and even foreign influence over our elections wouldn't be a partisan issue.

But the Republican leaders in Congress said no. In fact, they used their power to block the issue from even coming up for a vote.

This can only mean that the leaders of the other party want to keep the public in the dark. They don't want you to know which interests are paying for the ads. The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.

Well, we cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy. So we're going to continue to fight for reform and transparency. And I urge all of you to take up the same fight. Let's challenge every elected official who benefits from these ads to defend this practice or join us in stopping it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. I get the distinction, ...
I think Obama is doing a good job, considering the mess he inherited, really good, but I still would like a pony, even a small toy pony. Now is when we need great, not just good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #28
50. Still hanging off the edge of the cliff
We were hanging on with one finger before, now Obama has helped us get another finger or two for our grip.

We're still hanging by one hand off the edge of the cliff. We need great leaders, bold leaders, not leaders who believe in trickle down and the fools errand of bipartisanship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
11. little late for that statement..and blows one's mind..the only one he is fooling is himself.
fool me once..............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. So he's a fool for promoting campaign finance reform in light of Citizens United?
:shrug:

Swell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #14
25. Looking at most the posts in this thread, I think I'm gonna twist an old saying around a bit.
With Democrats like this, who needs republicans?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. That's assuming the negativity in this thread is expressed by Democrats...
Sorry, not buying that shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. True enough, some of the names tho are of claimed dems
I am going to take take their claim(of party) at face value even if I think some of their stances are wrong.

Obviously not all are democrats tho since this site is open to all basically, It is fascinating tho isn't it how many seems to want to attack the president over this topic rather then help pressure the congress to get it passed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. Did I say he was a "FOOL"..NO I DID NOT!..I said he was only fooling himself.Big difference..
Edited on Sat Aug-21-10 12:06 PM by flyarm
Do you have missing cognitive reading skills?

STOP TWISTING MY WORDS TO SUIT YOUR OWN AGENDA.

I think Obama is not a fool in any way!

Oh and while you are spewing your bullshit..I have been an ELECTED Democrat in my state. Have you been elected in the Democratic party ever??????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. "...the only one he is fooling is himself..."
Quote, from you. I'll let that one stand on its own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
15. Scumbaggy McConnell is *almost* as cynical as some DUers on this thread about the Obama-Dem position
Edited on Sat Aug-21-10 09:32 AM by jefferson_dem
on campaign finance reform.

"The president says this bill is about transparency. It's transparent alright. It's a transparent effort to rig the fall elections," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67K0VQ20100821?type=politicsNews

"Democrats" un-reccing a thread that highlights the President's call to stop unbridled corporate financing of election campaigns? Shame on you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnlucas Donating Member (248 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
17. Hahahahahahahaha!!
Edited on Sat Aug-21-10 09:59 AM by johnlucas
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Oh my God.
You know I think Obama answered the wrong calling in life.
He shoulda been a comedian not a President.

We cannot allow? What the hell?
Two hundred and something years too late, bruh.
Definitely at least a hundred and something.

So this is what's it's like to live in The Twilight Zone. Didn't think it would be this entertaining.
John Lucas

P.S.: I wonder how many takes it took for him not to bust out laughing when saying that line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
18. Um . . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
19. What the...? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Milo_Bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
20. Great example of THE PROBLEM.
The fight itself is so far to the right, that the outcome barely matters.

"President Obama criticized Republicans on Saturday for blocking a law that would force the backers of political "attack ads" to disclose who is paying for them."

Where is the argument set... not over whether Congress will work to really reform campaign laws or work to retract corporate personhood so that corporations are not given the rights of individuals... nope... no argument there.

All we are fighting about is whether ads that corporations buy have to have tiny, insignificant disclosures at the end of them that no one will ever read.

And if we win... there will be dozens of posts from the usual suspects declaring a HUGE VICTORY.

*SIGH*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nite Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
21. Sorry, Mr. President
but your health insurance plan did us in with the corporate takeover. You gifted them our lives. What have you done to stop any corporate infiltration of our lives? Banks go free, we go bankrupt, the war rages on with help from contractors that don't do their work and kill our troops without any kind of sentence. We are supposed to believe you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. We were "done in" some two hundred years ago with the
warning included in John Locke's, "Perpetual Corporate Sovereignty" and Marx followed, thereafter. The health insurance plan had little to do with "corporate takeovers." I didn't expect President Obama to come into office and revolutionize an entire system of government that has been in place since it's inception. That is an unrealistic expectation for anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
22. We can't allow it, but apparently it's ok to fascilitate it. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yuugal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
23. Thanks for the chuckle
I'm sure he'll get right on with fighting them evil corporations any day now.......NOT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seattleblue Donating Member (437 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
31. This has to be a joke.
"Corporate takeover of our democracy" is going to be fixed by requiring corporations to put a tag on their ads saying who is doing the funding? That is the solution? Wow, who knew it was that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stoic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
32. Private armies, private prisons, mega-industrial food processors.
I'd say it's too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
33. If Obama is serious, not doing his "nice rhetoric" that he's famous for, then
he better get started on it, cuz he's missed about a bzillion opportunities--health care, banking, education, housing, etc etc. He could have started out his presidency with those words, followed by actions, but he didn't.

Nice words, let's see some action...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
34. Dude, its going to take a hell of a lot more than a warning label on corporate propaganda
You might go along way yourself by putting the "stakeholders" in the corner instead of all around the table.

Maybe you should clear their dirty henchmen from your cabinet.

Maybe you'll stop utilizing corporate mercenaries.

Maybe you will cease to use our military as an acquisition and security force for said corporations.

Perhaps you will lead the charge to take our elections from their shifty and unverifiable hands.

How about you put the regulatory system under your umbrella right?

How about ending too big too fail that holds the global economy hostage?

How about not cutting bogus deals with Pharma to the detriment of our people?

Maybe a key to the treasury, an anti-trust exemption, small state run (and easily captured and/or overwhelmed) regulatory structures and pools, and the IRS as an enforcer isn't the best path to reducing the influence of the insurance cartel.

How about NOT covering for a corporate multi-felon like BP?

How about not spreading their lies like "Clean Coal" and "safe deep water extraction"?

Mr President, a little dab of disclaimer lipstick ain't gonna cover up this pig by a longshot.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
35. Excellent message, especially
coming after the President's action.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-21-10 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
39. "Too Little....Too Late." Sounds like Campaigning/Stumping for Dems not to lose...
after weak bargaining gave away it all....:-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-10 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
40. If he really believed that
he wouldn't have given insurance company reps and healthcare company reps seats at the table, with their demands already met in advance, during the "health care debates" while insulting and excluding the progressive wing of his own party.

Progressive legislators were EXCLUDED from having any role. They weren't allowed to represent us. They weren't allowed to influence the negotiations. They weren't allowed to even what was being discussed and passed around the table.

Only the conservaDems and the corporate reps were allowed at the table by his decision. So it's really hard to believe Obama now after he has already given into the Corporate Authorities. He has not only accepted corporate authority, he helped establish their authority on the most important and precedent setting negotiation of his administration.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denimgirly Donating Member (929 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #40
47. BINGO!
thank you for voicing this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyByNight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-10 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
41. Is he kidding?
"We cannot allow the corporate takeover of our democracy." This from the man who appointed Summers, Geithner and Emanuel, etc. Makes me wonder if he's actually paying attention to what's going on outside the Beltway.

Way too little. Way too late. Although, to be fair, the corporate takeover has been in effect for quite some time now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-10 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
42. They already took it over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-22-10 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
44. Not the democracy, but it's okay for schools though, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 04:42 AM
Response to Original message
45. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
46. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
48. Yes, it is. And, why the silence on the Fair Elections Now Act?
President Obama supported public financing of federal campaigns when he was a senator. Perhaps in the lame duck session? 'Hope' springs eternal, Mr. President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
49. Yes, it is. And, why the silence on the Fair Elections Now Act?
President Obama supported public financing of federal campaigns when he was a senator. Perhaps in the lame duck session? 'Hope' springs eternal, Mr. President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
51. The mind boggles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LatteLibertine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-23-10 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
52. Correct
We definitely need reform. We should vote all Wall Street lackeys out of office. You may know them by the causes they champion and most importantly how they vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joe black Donating Member (514 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-24-10 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
53. watch what I do not what I say.
Good advise when dealing with the prez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-24-10 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
54. Wow, Obama doesn't even know he's a corporatist
Or is in denial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Jan 05th 2025, 05:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC