TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Explosive New Video
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Explosive New Video - Page 2

post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I see many, many, if not most on here trashing on McCain and Sarah Palin constantly. Perhaps you can, also, ask them the same questions you are asking me.
I think there's more vocal McCain supporters here, and if you look at all the one-sided Obama bashing threads started recently, they're mostly by you!
post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarahp View Post
I think there's more vocal McCain supporters here, and if you look at all the one-sided Obama bashing threads started recently, they're mostly by you!
No idea how many threads have been started by whom, but I'd wager that there's a much larger percentage of posts AGAINST McCain and Palin AND Bush. I can count the vocal McCain/Palin/Bush supporters without having to take of my shoes.
post #33 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
You must have missed all my posts outlining exactly why I am for McCain.
Sorry.

I see many, many, if not most on here trashing on McCain and Sarah Palin constantly. Perhaps you can, also, ask them the same questions you are asking me. No?

Oh, and for the record, I have said repeatedly that this debacle is NOT limited to one party.
But I most definitely have seen posts saying "it's all Bush's fault" so please, respectfully, pardon me for showing that the statement of it all being Bush's fault is not true.

Please if most posts are trashing on palin and mccain educate me on where to find them cause I just havent seen them on here or not nearly as prevelent as the posts that I have found trashing obama and the democratic party. Also the posts on why Mccain would make a good president cause I haven't found those eiter. I would be interested to see either one of these posts.
post #34 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazycatlover View Post
Please if most posts are trashing on palin and mccain educate me on where to find them cause I just havent seen them on here or not nearly as prevelent as the posts that I have found trashing obama and the democratic party. Also the posts on why Mccain would make a good president cause I haven't found those eiter. I would be interested to see either one of these posts.
Really? Check the Palin thread it is 100 pages of trash, bash and spit.

(j/k,only 45 pages)

As for McCain, respectfully, you will have to go search as I am not going to go dredge up my many posts of why I believe McCain will make the best President because you didn't see them or don't believe me. They are there, I assure.
post #35 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Really? Check the Palin thread it is 100 pages of trash, bash and spit.

(j/k,only 45 pages)

As for McCain, respectfully, you will have to go search as I am not going to go dredge up my many posts of why I believe McCain will make the best President because you didn't see them or don't believe me. They are there, I assure.
lol it has nothing to do with me not believing you it has to do with me not seeing them and wanting to see what you have to see.
post #36 of 46

Just a reminder to use PMs for personal conversations!
post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Not sure what the above means. Are you saying McCain accepted money from Freddie/Fannie?
Yes. Both candidates and many others have taken donations. McCain got a little closer in a roundabout way through fundraisers but all politicians took a little something from them. Including Obama.
post #38 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post

Link below is a pretty reliable source of who got money from Frddie and Fannie
The source may even be one we can all agree on.


http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008...d-freddie.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
Yes. Both candidates and many others have taken donations. McCain got a little closer in a roundabout way through fundraisers but all politicians took a little something from them. Including Obama.
The list I linked is legit, all there for all to see, perhaps take a look at it.

" A little something " I like that.
post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
The list I linked is legit, all there for all to see, perhaps take a look at it.

" A little something " I like that.
Even Bernie Sanders got 250 dollars from them.

I got engrossed reading the link and bookmarked it for future references. I read it.
No one is immune. Republicans and Democrats took money. Independents. The only people who didn't are the Green, Constitutional and Libertarian candidates. Which is why a third party will never get anywhere. You need big donors to run a race.
I looked at the investors too:http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008...lost-17-m.html

What I meant about McCain getting more money was from fundraisers and has more Freddie lobbyists on staff.

Thanks a lot Cindy now you have given me a new toy to play with when I am bored.
post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
Even Bernie Sanders got 250 dollars from them.
I saw that! And I bet we get a better explanation from him for the lousy $250 than we do from all the rest of them! Digoenes is going to be wandering around Capitol Hill for a LONG time with his lantern!
post #41 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
Yes. Both candidates and many others have taken donations. McCain got a little closer in a roundabout way through fundraisers but all politicians took a little something from them. Including Obama.
A "little something?" Obama is #2 on the list.

Which is a little odd, considering the very short time he's been there. This is the sort of thing that just makes the day of the "Manchurian Candidate" wackos!
post #42 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
A "little something?" Obama is #2 on the list.

Which is a little odd, considering the very short time he's been there. This is the sort of thing that just makes the day of the "Manchurian Candidate" wackos!
Looks like they tried to put the money where they thought they would get the most bang for the buck.
Quote:
In the 2006 election cycle, Fannie Mae was giving 53 percent of its total $1.3 million in contributions to Republicans, who controlled Congress at that time. This cycle, with Democrats in control, they've reversed course, giving the party 56 percent of their total $1.1 million in contributions.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also strategically given more contributions to lawmakers currently sitting on committees that primarily regulate their industry. Fifteen of the 25 lawmakers who have received the most from the two companies combined since the 1990 election sit on either the House Financial Services Committee; the Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee; or the Senate Finance Committee. The others have seats on the powerful Appropriations or Ways & Means committees, are members of the congressional leadership or have run for president.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008...-of-fanni.html

However, things are apparently not quite as simple as that chart makes it appear.
Quote:
The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list — using figures from the Federal Election Commission — shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.

Explaining the difference, the Center for Responsive Politics said on its Web site that it does not include members of the board of directors because they could serve on boards of various companies. Their contributions are listed along with other employees of the companies they work for. And the center says lobbyists usually represent multiple clients as well, so their contributions are listed under their lobbying firms — except in-house lobbyists, who are included in the center's list.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...e-and-freddie/

And it gets REALLY interesting if you look at the contributions made by individuals to the two presidential campaigns (this shows where McCain's $169,000 and Obama's $16,000 came from and it names names )
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...ie.graphic.jpg
post #43 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
A "little something?" Obama is #2 on the list.

Which is a little odd, considering the very short time he's been there. This is the sort of thing that just makes the day of the "Manchurian Candidate" wackos!
In comparison to what they have gotten from other donors it is a 'little something' especially within campaigns running off of hundreds of millions of dollars.
I saw Obama got more money from individuals than PACs as did McCain. But then I saw that McCain had investments with them and Obama did not. McCain has Freddie lobyists on his campaign. Obama does not. BUT EVERYONE got a 'little something' from them. Those numbers don't show the other stuff they do.
Its DC hopefully no one is surprised. I don't think either candidate has been bought and sold by them though.

I don't think the time frame is odd at all considering the campaigns he has run going back to the Illinois senate.
I thought George Bush was the manchurian candidate put together by Cheney and the neo-cons.
post #44 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2dogmom View Post
Looks like they tried to put the money where they thought they would get the most bang for the buck.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008...-of-fanni.html

However, things are apparently not quite as simple as that chart makes it appear.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...e-and-freddie/

And it gets REALLY interesting if you look at the contributions made by individuals to the two presidential campaigns (this shows where McCain's $169,000 and Obama's $16,000 came from and it names names )
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...ie.graphic.jpg
Thanks, you put the numbers in what I was trying to say.
EWW Alphonse D'Amato was a crook.
post #45 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
In comparison to what they have gotten from other donors it is a 'little something' especially within campaigns running off of hundreds of millions of dollars.
I saw Obama got more money from individuals than PACs as did McCain. But then I saw that McCain had investments with them and Obama did not. McCain has Freddie lobyists on his campaign. Obama does not. BUT EVERYONE got a 'little something' from them. Those numbers don't show the other stuff they do.
Its DC hopefully no one is surprised. I don't think either candidate has been bought and sold by them though.

I don't think the time frame is odd at all considering the campaigns he has run going back to the Illinois senate.
I thought George Bush was the manchurian candidate put together by Cheney and the neo-cons.
****SIGN**** McCain does not have "Freddie Lobbyists on his campaign" LOL

Obama gets economoic advice from Franklin Raines, one of the worst of the worst guys in this crisis. Franklin Raines should probably be hung.
post #46 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
****SIGN**** McCain does not have "Freddie Lobbyists on his campaign" LOL

Obama gets economoic advice from Franklin Raines, one of the worst of the worst guys in this crisis. Franklin Raines should probably be hung.
He does so!
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...OnE&refer=home

You can't compare Raines because he was never active on his campaign and has not ever given him any money. He is an irrelevant tie. McCain's people want to make a bigger deal of it to equalize their own deep ties.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Explosive New Video