Obama takes money from Big Oil & voted for Cheney's energy bill

[ElsewheresDaughter]

Run time: 00:31 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4J2u3PHk5A   Posted on YouTube: April 15, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: April 16, 2008 By DU Member: ElsewheresDaughter Views on DU: 2797

 

[Clear Blue Sky]

1. Big deal.

Are there any politicians who have NOT taken money from big oil?

[jackson_dem]

8. The issue is Obama lying to people without any shame

[Maribelle]

44. Issues mean nothing to Obama followers.

They have proven this far too often.

[Political Heretic]

48. Issues mean nothing to Clinton followers. They have proven this far too often.

OMG SEE WUT I DID THER??!?!?!?!?!

[lumpy]

51. I'm sure Obama can come up with some convoluted

explaination for claiming that he has not accepted money from oil execs. He uses the waffle iron frequently.

[mahina]

25. She means the bill that the Apollo Alliance, major renewable proponents, supported.

http://www.apolloalliance.org/

I remember the Apollo Alliance page the day that bill passed. They were elated, as were many in the renewables field.

[Voice for Peace]

30. thanks for that link!

[mahina]

37. You bet!

I agree there were problems with the bill, but renewable tech co.s were celebrating its passage. This is a bogus tactic. (surprise)

[Road Scholar]

31. From employees, not the corporation. $200K is chickenfeed. What

a spin!! Hillary is on their fucking payroll. :shrug:

[lumpy]

52. Oil executives IS the corporation, doncha' know ?

Oil executives are wedded, embedded and the life blood of a corporation.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

50. it is a big deal when you run your whole campaign on "not taking lobby money"

[lumpy]

53. Personally, I've had it with lying no matter from who is doing it.

Obama's unprecise answers and explanations fall flat. I'm beginning to see through Mr. Obama's hot air and smoke, if you will.

[guyanakoolaid]

2. Whose campaign has taken the most PAC and lobbyist money, and whose has refused it?

glass houses...

[TLM]

4. Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.... n/t

[TLM]

3. People who work for an industry, making personal donations...

isn't taking money from the oil industry.


Notice the totals.... all under the limit for individual doantions.



Hillary just can;t defend the fact that she takes pac and lobbyist money.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

5. Hillary doesn't run her camapign on the lie that he does NOT take lobbyist money like Obama does

[NJSecularist]

6. She runs her campaign on multiple other lies though.

Including her pro-gun stance when she had the position of gun control ever since she joined the Senate.

[HDPaulG]

11. Accepting money.....

From employee's of a company is not the same as accepting money from lobbyists...Unless you are ducking sniper fire.

[jackson_dem]

15. Remember Edwards' rhetorical question to Obama?

"Do you think they (drug companies who gave more money to Obama than any candidate in either party) are interested in good government or do they expect something in return?"

[MADem]

20. You're wasting your time. They can't handle the cognitive dissonance so they

pretend that people bundling individual donations within a corporation are somehow "different" from evil bigwigs tossing dough at a candidate. They've been given "the response" (It's INDIVIDUALS, acting FREELY, it's NOT corporate, NO, NO, NO!!!!) and they'll repeat it ad infinitum, and if it gets too difficult or too dissonant they'll put you on "ignore" (as if that's a real 'feelings hurter' :rofl: ) and flounce off angrily. "I'll show YOU...I'll put YOU on IGNORE!!!" They think sticking their fingers in their ears, so the "bad thoughts" can't intrude, will fix the essential problem--only it won't. Those corporate bundlers are still corporate bundling, and they're doing it for a reason.

But ignorance is bliss. And it's the modus operandi.

Edwards is right. It's all about "quid pro quo." You don't throw your money at the guy who's gonna cut your earnings and make your life worse, so you THINK, anyway. You toss your money at the guy who is good for YOUR business, your profit, your bottom line.

That whole "clean coal" schtick is interesting, too. That's a subject for another day. And the Crown family of General Dynamics? What's up with THOSE corporate donations? Those are the scariest, and most UNDERREPORTED, of all.

The business of GD is WAR...and not much else.

[jackson_dem]

22. Exactly, corp executives aren't giving money to Obama because they think he will crack down on them

[Juche]

27. What cognitive dissonance

The ad says he has raised $200k from people in the oil business. Since Obama raises $30-50 million a month that means about three hours of donations are from people who work in the oil industry. So from 7-10am tomorrow, that is the time when people in the oil field are donating to Obama.

As we keep saying, the fact that people in that field have donated money doesn't make them lobbyists. When I donate money I am not a lobbyist for the pharmaceutical or chemical industry, I'm a private citizen.

Do you or jackson dem have any evidence that these are bundlers who expect favors in return?

[MADem]

38. You are a private citizen who does not anticipate that your candidate is gonna FUCK you.

Unless you're a Republican voter.

Only the GOP vote against their own economic interests.

You send money to candidates who you think will make your situation, and that includes your job prospects and your employment future, better.

OR....you send money to candidates that your bundling boss SUGGESTS you send money to....of course, they don't "coerce" you, but when it comes down to you getting that promotion and Checkbook Chuck two desks over from you, guess who gets the big raise and the private office?

:eyes:

But go on and be "deliberately obtuse" if you'd like. Pretend you have no wide-eyed idea how the world works.

[haymakeragain]

39. Yeah, right, he's gonna fuck us like the Iraq vote, the Iran vote,

welfare "reform", NAFTA, etc, etc. You're full of shit if you think that just because you say so, it means that Obama is going to transform into Dick Cheney.

Damn you guys are reaching for straws, and curiously, simultaneously on message, just like right-wing radio. Are you guys getting blast faxes or spams from some Rovian-like puppeteer?

[MADem]

46. I invite your attention to post forty five. Money talks, bullshit walks. NT

[Juche]

42. Are you serious or sarcastic

I can't tell. Most of Obamas voters give less than $1000. What do they expect? Do oil companies who donate 200k really expect it to let them own a candidate who has raised over 120 million in the last 3 months alone?

Obama will easily raise over 500 million from small donors, why would he be in the pocket of a handful of people who work in the petrolium industry (maybe a million workers) who donate 200k or so? Wouldn't that alienate the hundreds of millions he raised by peopel who donated because he wasn't a corporate lackey?

Suffice it to say I see no evidence that Obama is in the pocket of industry, or the money he gains is from bundlers forcing their employees to do it in an effort to control Obama's politics in office.

The evidence and logic of these arguments are lacking.

[MADem]

45. You don't know much about your candidate. You are so sincere when

insist that his is a "little people's" campaign. It isn't. Why has the CROWN FAMILY of Chicago supported him for so many years? They have given him many tens of thousands personally over the years, and bundled HUNDREDS of thousands.

Their business is WAR. General Dynamics makes most of their money off of the taxpayer teat, courtesy of the Pentagon. Go on, look them up. There's a suspicious disconnect there.

He has big money, only it's cleverly bundled. And these bundlers make the Bush Pioneers and Rangers look like fucking PIKERS.

You're very naive if you think otherwise.

Of course, this IS an inconvenient truth: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/10/AR2008041004045_pf.html

those with wealth and power also have played a critical role in creating Obama's record-breaking fundraising machine, and their generosity has earned them a prominent voice in shaping his campaign. Seventy-nine "bundlers," five of them billionaires, have tapped their personal networks to raise at least $200,000 each. They have helped the campaign recruit more than 27,000 donors to write checks for $2,300, the maximum allowed. Donors who have given more than $200 account for about half of Obama's total haul, which stands at nearly $240 million.

Obama's success in assembling bundlers offers another perspective on a campaign that promotes itself as a grass-roots effort. While the senator from Illinois has had unprecedented success generating small donations, many made online, the work of bundlers first signaled the seriousness of his candidacy a year ago and will be crucial as he heads into the final Democratic primaries with a lead against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.).

The bundler list also sheds light on those who might seek to influence an Obama White House. It includes traditional Democratic givers -- Hollywood, trial lawyers and Wall Street -- and newcomers such as young hedge fund executives, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, Chicago-based developers and members of the black business elite. One-third had never contributed to a presidential campaign, much less raised money.

The list includes partners from 18 top law firms, 21 Wall Street executives and power brokers from Fortune 500 companies. California is the top source, with 19 bundlers. Both Illinois and Washington, D.C., have six, and five hail from New York.

Among the group are businessmen such as Kenneth Griffin, a famously private 39-year-old billionaire who threw his support behind Obama's presidential campaign just as he hired a team of lobbyists to urge Congress to preserve a lucrative tax loophole.

A year ago, Griffin invited Obama to speak to employees of his Chicago hedge fund, Citadel Investment Group, and in subsequent months, employees and their families gave the candidate nearly $200,000. Griffin had previously backed Republicans, including Obama's initial U.S. Senate opponent.

Obama resisted Citadel's lobbying push, but a hedge fund executive who knows Griffin said he suspects Griffin's continued support owes to more than a desire to sway the senator on the tax issue. "Ken's a smart guy, and I guess he's done the math and decided that Barack is the best candidate," said Daniel Loeb, the chief executive of Third Point Management in New York.

Several on Obama's list at least appear to have interests in conflict with his platform. There is the billionaire casino developer who plans to put a slot parlor in Philadelphia; Obama has decried gambling for its steep "moral and social cost." And there is the director of General Dynamics, the military supplier that has seen profits soar since the onset of the Iraq war and that has benefited from at least one Obama earmark.

Hope, Change, BELIEVE? Believe this guy is a typical politician. Otherwise, you stand to be horribly disappointed.

[humbled_opinion]

33. I agree with the blinders on

Sentiment of your post. I like Obama, I think the way he articulates the country's problems is his biggest plus, however, I am starting to see the cracks in the foundation and am getting concerned whether he can pull it off over the GOP or not....

Personally I didn't like the Bitter people remarks and I know exactly what he meant, but by saying it he came down to their level... The vulnerability now is that the GOP is going to paint him as a Marxist and to centrist America that is not a good thing.

We need a united party and Hillary is dividing it... The only way we even have a chance at change is to get a Democrat in the WH and that should be all of our goals.

[lumpy]

54. Major stockholders and CEOs making big $$$$$ is the

corporation.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jackson_dem]

14. Please. Why do you think executives bundle funds for candidates?

[haymakeragain]

40. Cover their asses? Wake up tool, they think he can win.

It's a fact, Hillary is bought and paid for and this little sham you're playing ain't gonna change anything.

[sce56]

18. There was a thread here a few days ago where a person commented on the fact that he was a lobbyist

and gave a personal donation to Obama not related to any lobbying the Campaign sent back his check saying he would not accept from a registered lobbyist! Now how do we not know those people that sent him the money who were from Big Oil did not do it on purpose to make him look dirty?

[GMFORD]

24. I saw that.

And it was only a $100 donation. We seem to be crawling with the same trolls here that have infected MyDD. They've got a handful of talking points they repeat over and over ad nauseum. No creativity, no original thinking, but loads of boring.

[KSinTX]

21. Individuals exercising their First Amendment right

AREN'T lobbyists. They're voters. How is this a lie? If you can find a single, registered oil lobbyist who has donated to the Obama campaign (the FEC has a by name listing) I will cede the point that he has lied. I'll wait ...

[jackson_dem]

9. Please. Those executives don't give money for their health

[Juche]

7. Those are individual donations

Obama has 1.3 million donors giving up to $4600 each. That doesn't mean he is in the pocket of big oil. And it is illegal for a company to coerce their employees to donate to one candidate or another.

That is a very misleading ad. Taking PAC money or fundraisers sponsored by oil companies are not the same as someone who works at Chevron donating $1000 for personal reasons.

[jackson_dem]

10. It is illegal to "coerce" but legal for executives to "agree" to bundle

That is what they do to get around the legal ban on corporations giving money.

[Juche]

28. Do you have evidence

Do you have any evidence that this statement is true, that the 200k was bundlers who were coercing their employees to donate to Obama?

[haymakeragain]

41. Hell no! Evidence to the contrary is obvious though, you can smell it.

It stinks of desperation. Desperately trying to cover up the fact that their candidate is owned by Corpo Amero.

[AtomicKitten]

13. And Hillary is the #1 recipient of lobbyist money.

You must be so proud.

[aaroh]

16. yeah as if Hillary doesn't take money from oil company employees, hypocrite

[HDPaulG]

17. Not only is Hillary....

A hypocrite....She is a 'C' word...a Clinton.

[jackson_dem]

19. Hillary isn't lying to PA voters with an ad claiming she doesn't like Obama

[emilyg]

23. Yep.

[ificandream]

26. If only Hillary ...

... went after McCain as hard as she goes after Obama.

[NM Independent]

29. Hey Hillary,

I hate to tell you this, but nobody is buying this BS.

You should try some honest campaigning before it's too late.

You were ahead in the polls by 20 points in PA just a few weeks ago. Now it's a 6 point spread.

You've royally screwed yourself with dishonesty and rabid disgusting tactics.

You are completely out of touch, and prove it by encompassing and representing so much of that which this nation is so bitter about. YOU are the elitist, and you've become indistinguishable from a repuglican. Please, Slink Away!!

[evolvingsteve]

34. well said...

and people will still post childish comments that ignore true logic to comments that Obama supporters post....I've noticed a trend on this thread where Hillary supporters are like Republicans.....they change the subject or don't comment on points that are brought up from us, and comment when when they can either find a way to spin something without proof or comment to something that they MIGHT have a talking point on (mostly coming out in the sense of changing the subject)....

To all you Hillary supporters, we Hope we can have you back with the Democrats one of these days and learn to debate like a Democrat again once Obama is the nominee...



:smoke:

[humbled_opinion]

35. WOW...

So if its Democrats voting in the Primary and she is pulling roughly 40 something percent in this tight contest by being a centrist or rather in your words indeistinguishable from a repuglican, then where will the people that are voting for her go when Obama gets the Nomination?

[evolvingsteve]

36. Exactly!!!

....but the great thing is, Obama can reach across divides and bring in Republicans to turn over (wake up!) and be apart of the campaign for true Democratic values and a New way of politics than of the past....

(don't forget about Obama not really nailing her for her Bosnia Lies out of his own mouth because the story just needed to be told 4 different times from her...., people notice after a while the difference between them both...)





;) :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[durrrty libby]

32. K & R for the Fraud known as BO

[DutchLiberal]

43. It's amusing to see people who would normally strongly condemn this behavior, now rush out to defend

Barack Obama.

I suppose it's the wrong thing to do when you're a Republican or when you're Hillary Clinton, but when you're Barack Obama... hey! What's wrong with it? So what? Everybody does it! And Hillary is mean! And... and.. and...

[MADem]

47. Yes. Quite so.

Interesting article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/10/AR2008041004045_pf.html

[Political Heretic]

49. Try arguing with me.

I hadn't really followed this particular stream of criticism and debate, so I didn't really understand what the issue was. Obama said, correct me if I'm wrong, that he doesn't take money from "Big Oil." Well, obviously there is no company named "Big Oil" and no person named "Big Oil" so I assumed that it was common sense that he was referring to lobbyists representing the oil industry. As far as I know, that statement is true.

Now, it is pointed out that individual employees from Oil companies have donated collectively what amounts to chump change - I believe it is 200,000 dollars. Employees are not the same as lobbyists. I would happily take money from individuals regardless of where they worked, as would Hillary Clinton or any other candidate. I'm not sure where the lie is, and I'm not sure where the problem is.

To me, a bigger question would be, which candidate has taken the most money from PACs and actual lobbyists? I'm pretty sure its not Barack Obama.

Next, MADem posted an article up thread. Inside it stated that about half of the money the Obama campaign has raised has come from over 200$ contributions. It's interesting the way that article presents the information. "About" half is actually less than half, meaning the majority of contributions to the Obama campaign have been under 200$ totaling 240 milllion to the date of the article. That's the story. It's traditional politics to have the majority of funds raised come from over 200$ donors. It is a new thing to have record-breaking fundraising and had the majority of those donations be under $200 dollars. It's even more interesting to not that the average donation size - average including all donation amounts - is 98 bucks. It's pretty hard to spin that into "Obama's campaign is dominated by rich powerful donors" without lying.

Next, the vote on Cheney's energy bill. I would have preferred if Obama voted against it. However, I am also not stupid. I'm aware that there were compelling reasons to vote for the bill. For one thing, the bill included both energy subsidies and tax changes that some like factcheck.org have suggested resulted in a net tax increase on Oil Companies. Others have disputed that, but no one denies that the all the combined provisions of the bill did not amount to either a huge decrease or increase in Oil's taxes or subsidies. On the other hand, there were provisions in it for renewable energy that many people were eagerly, anxiously waiting for. As mentioned up thread, Apollo Alliance (major proponents of renewable energy) supported the bill and were elated that it passed.

There was good and bad in the bill. What's really going on here is Clinton supporters are touting the "supported Cheney's bill" meme as a knee-jerk smear over what actually amounts to a complicated issue.

Again, I am still struggling to find the lie in all of this.