Was Obama rattled by developing donor scandal story?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tampa_Dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was at the Ohio State vs. Nebraska game this weekend, so I missed all political news. Has the mainstream media picked up on the story or not?

*My Buckeyes routed Nebraska like Romney routed Obama in the debate
 
Tampa_Dave said:
I was at the Ohio State vs. Nebraska game this weekend, so I missed all political news. Has the mainstream media picked up on the story or not?

*My Buckeyes routed Nebraska like Romney routed Obama in the debate
Click to expand...
Geez I can’t believe Hewitt isn’t all over this…being that his hapless Browns can’t win a game. (Ohio football not the donor story :D)

I’m seeing a bit about the donor scandal but you know anything that might negatively impact Obama evokes only crickets chirping

Lisa
 
LisaA said:
Geez I can’t believe Hewitt isn’t all over this…being that his hapless Browns can’t win a game. (Ohio football not the donor story :D)

I’m seeing a bit about the donor scandal but you know anything that might negatively impact Obama evokes only crickets chirping

Lisa
Click to expand...
I was afraid of that. I figured they would be harping on the 7.8% unemployment figure to the detriment of the campaign donation scandal (sigh). Why am I not surprised …
 
you can bet that the obama campaign people are working overtime trying to keep this story on the down low. this is all they need just a few weeks from the election.
 
7_Sorrows said:
:bigyikes: that is almost like asking the cat to investigate who ate the canary. isn’t there anyone else higher than Holder that can ask that a probe into Obama campaign donations be made?
Click to expand...
This would probably have more impact if politicians had the right motivations behind their ‘investigations’. They shouldn’t be used as ‘campaign’ tools, but used in the interest of the people. Scan through the ‘news’ threads on these forums. Many of those ‘news’ threads are anything that one feels might reflect poorly on a particular candidate, or party, similar to the campaign ads we are exposed to. No ads tell us what a candidate plans to do. They all attack the other side. It’s all about gaining, and maintaining, power.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
This would probably have more impact if politicians had the right motivations behind their ‘investigations’. They shouldn’t be used as ‘campaign’ tools, but used in the interest of the people. Scan through the ‘news’ threads on these forums. Many of those ‘news’ threads are anything that one feels might reflect poorly on a particular candidate, or party, similar to the campaign ads we are exposed to. No ads tell us what a candidate plans to do. They all attack the other side. It’s all about gaining, and maintaining, power.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that political ads are about gaining power. Of course they are. Politics is about governance, and governance requires power. But power isn’t an evil in itself. The Pope has power relative to the bishops and the Vatican workers. The CEO of the most beneficent company on earth has power. Jesus Himself had power and said so. The real questions are what the person seeking power seeks to do with it, and can he do it wisely and effectively.

In this campaign, there is a candidate who has used power to oppress the Church, to promote abortion and homosexual “marriage” and (earlier in life) to kill infants. On the other hand, there is a candidate who, when he had power, benefitted his state, then his company, then a public event in the use of that power, and some of the most prominent of his political enemies admit it.

So politics is not a featureless plain; not in the ads and not by people in here who argue for this proposition or that. There really are heights and abysses. People should not be condemned for believing there really are differences in candidates, or for saying so.
 
Ridgerunner said:
I agree with you that political ads are about gaining power. Of course they are. Politics is about governance, and governance requires power. But power isn’t an evil in itself. The Pope has power relative to the bishops and the Vatican workers. The CEO of the most beneficent company on earth has power. Jesus Himself had power and said so. The real questions are what the person seeking power seeks to do with it, and can he do it wisely and effectively.

In this campaign, there is a candidate who has used power to oppress the Church, to promote abortion and homosexual “marriage” and (earlier in life) to kill infants. On the other hand, there is a candidate who, when he had power, benefitted his state, then his company, then a public event in the use of that power, and some of the most prominent of his political enemies admit it.

So politics is not a featureless plain; not in the ads and not by people in here who argue for this proposition or that. There really are heights and abysses. People should not be condemned for believing there really are differences in candidates, or for saying so.
Click to expand...
👍👍👍 Thank you for the thoughtful and compelling reply. It is so demoralizing to hear people claim that both parties are the same, that all politicians are crooks that we should all just curse God and die…

While the perfect party or perfect candidate doesn’t exist, certainly there are huge differences on many significant issues. While we argue about Big Bird or free birth control pills, there are far more serious concerns.

Lisa
 
Ridgerunner said:
So politics is not a featureless plain; not in the ads and not by people in here who argue for this proposition or that. There really are heights and abysses. People should not be condemned for believing there really are differences in candidates, or for saying so.
Click to expand...
There are differences in the candidates, according to each candidate’s ads that point out the flaws in the other side. The ads still lack their own plans. 🤷
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
There are differences in the candidates, according to each candidate’s ads that point out the flaws in the other side. The ads still lack their own plans. 🤷
Click to expand...
Try their websites. The ads are too brief to lay out the specifics of a jobs plan.
 
Tampa_Dave said:
washingtonexaminer.com/article/2509895/#.UG4xohhvZFX

Was Obama Rattled by Developing Donor Scandal Story?

"President Obama reelection campaign, rattled by his Wednesday night debate performance, could be in for even worse news. According to knowledgable sources, a national magazine and a national web site are preparing a blockbuster donor scandal story.

Sources told Secrets that the Obama campaign has been trying to block the story. But a key source said it plans to publish the story Friday or, more likely, Monday.

According to the sources, a taxpayer watchdog group conducted a nine-month investigation into presidential and congressional fundraising and has uncovered thousands of cases of credit card solicitations and donations to Obama and Capitol Hill, allegedly from unsecured accounts, and many from overseas. That might be a violation of federal election laws.

The Obama campaign has received hundreds of millions in small dollar donations, many via credit card donations through their website. On Thursday, the campaign announced a record September donor haul of $150 million.

At the end of the 2008 presidential campaign, the Obama-Biden effort was hit with a similar scandal. At the time, the Washington Post reported that the Obama campaign let donors use “largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity.”
Click to expand...
Darrell Issa ought to look into this.
 
7_Sorrows said:
:bigyikes: that is almost like asking the cat to investigate who ate the canary. isn’t there anyone else higher than Holder that can ask that a probe into Obama campaign donations be made?
Click to expand...
Darrel Issa.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
There are differences in the candidates, according to each candidate’s ads that point out the flaws in the other side. The ads still lack their own plans. 🤷
Click to expand...
It is a shame that a substantial segment of the public relies on one-liner ads instead of seeking real knowledge. It would probably make little difference if either candidate got specific in those brief ads. How would they detail plans in those?

But experience is a valid teacher, at least as regards Obama, and the lessons are crystal clear as regards his ideological bent and his ability/inability to positively influence events.
 
Ridgerunner said:
It is a shame that a substantial segment of the public relies on one-liner ads instead of seeking real knowledge. It would probably make little difference if either candidate got specific in those brief ads. How would they detail plans in those?

But experience is a valid teacher, at least as regards Obama, and the lessons are crystal clear as regards his ideological bent and his ability/inability to positively influence events.
Click to expand...
Let’s look at this thread as an example; where’s the impending story? What sources are not biased? There are a lot of variables to just picking detail plan explanations online, and getting the ‘real’ story.

On your second part, I agree. We know Obama’s record, why is it necessary for other candidates to repeat it with every breath, when they could be giving us their own plan in detail?
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Let’s look at this thread as an example; where’s the impending story? What sources are not biased? There are a lot of variables to just picking detail plan explanations online, and getting the ‘real’ story.

On your second part, I agree. We know Obama’s record, why is it necessary for other candidates to repeat it with every breath, when they could be giving us their own plan in detail?
Click to expand...
The sources are probably all biased, to a degree. But when something is a story on both sides, it goes beyond just a political position.

Why is it necessary to repeat Obama’s record? Two reasons:
  1. There are still undecided voters. It is incomprehensible to me that anyone could be undecided at this point, but some clearly are. If they are undecided, they could not possibly know the ramifications of Obama’s plans and actions. Thus the need to try to catch peoples’ attention with them.
  2. How much of a plan do you think anybody can give in a 30 second spot? I recall in watching the Romney-Obama debate, Obama asked Romney to give his plan. I wish Romney had said “Well, if you’ll give me all the rest of your time tonight and if Mr. Lehrer will tolerate it, I’ll be glad to.” And that’s because you can’t get very deep into plan details without taking a lot of time to do it. All Romney could realistically do was repeat his five points.
I’ll grant, Obama has a lot to defend. He has had four years in office, and ought to expect to do it. Even so, there isn’t much time for him to do it in ads either.

Unfortunately, there are those, though, who really don’t know what, e.g., the costs of Obamacare really are, the adverse things that are happening with it even now, what’s going on the middle East, what’s happening (not happening) with energy development. They’ll all know in 2013-2016, but by then it will be too late.
 
LisaA said:
👍👍👍 Thank you for the thoughtful and compelling reply. It is so demoralizing to hear people claim that both parties are the same, that all politicians are crooks that we should all just curse God and die…

While the perfect party or perfect candidate doesn’t exist, certainly there are huge differences on many significant issues. While we argue about Big Bird or free birth control pills, there are far more serious concerns.

Lisa
Click to expand...
DITO, I wish this forum had the “thumbs up” 👍 and “thumbs down” buttons so we could give kudos where deserved
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top