TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Greasing the palms
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Greasing the palms  

post #1 of 27
10/22/08 at 7:19am
Thread Starter 
of the machine in Philly..

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loca..._November.html

Might be what BHO is saving that cash for.
post #2 of 27
10/23/08 at 4:59am
Thread Starter 
No one interested in this???? Looked like important information for voters, knowing how the political machine needs a little "lubrication" sometimes.
post #3 of 27
10/23/08 at 5:06am
Well, I googled "street money", and apparently it is a longstanding tradition there, practiced by every candidate thus far, which puts it in the "Oh, ok...so what?" category.
post #4 of 27
10/23/08 at 5:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Well, I googled "street money", and apparently it is a longstanding tradition there, practiced by every candidate thus far, which puts it in the "Oh, ok...so what?" category.
I researched it too and it seems like it has been done for a long time to compensate campaign workers. Where in other cities you would have volunteers, in Philly they want 10-75 dollars as compensation.
No controversy there.
post #5 of 27
10/23/08 at 5:45am
And "greasing the palms" refers to bribery. I didn't read this as bribery.
post #6 of 27
10/23/08 at 6:58am
Thread Starter 
During the primary, the Obama campaign didn't pay street money to the Democratic City Committee, which Brady said wasn't unusual given that Obama hadn't been endorsed by the local Democrats - they chose not to endorse. Still, competing candidates often give election cash to supportive ward leaders to boost turnout.

Obama didn't do that in the spring. When some ward leaders who backed him complained, many predicted it would cost him votes. Obama survived the resulting bruised feelings and strained relationships, but experts say it would be harder for him to stiff the party now that he's the endorsed candidate.



Sounds like buying votes to me.
post #7 of 27
10/23/08 at 7:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
During the primary, the Obama campaign didn't pay street money to the Democratic City Committee, which Brady said wasn't unusual given that Obama hadn't been endorsed by the local Democrats - they chose not to endorse. Still, competing candidates often give election cash to supportive ward leaders to boost turnout.

Obama didn't do that in the spring. When some ward leaders who backed him complained, many predicted it would cost him votes. Obama survived the resulting bruised feelings and strained relationships, but experts say it would be harder for him to stiff the party now that he's the endorsed candidate.



Sounds like buying votes to me.
If it is, then everyone is doing it.
post #8 of 27
10/23/08 at 7:16am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
If it is, then everyone is doing it.
I don't see anyone else being asked to cough up the cash in that article.
post #9 of 27
10/23/08 at 7:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
I don't see anyone else being asked to cough up the cash in that article.
You're only focusing on one article. Try Googling "street money", (make sure to use the quotation marks or you'll get all sorts of stuff). It's a tradition as old as the city itself, and everyone's been doing it.

It only became news because Obama originally refused to pay it.
post #10 of 27
10/23/08 at 7:22am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
It only became news because Obama originally refused to pay it.
Which was my point.
post #11 of 27
10/23/08 at 7:25am
So then it's a non issue. Everyone can keep doing it, or they all can stop. No problems.
post #12 of 27
10/23/08 at 7:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
[i]During the primary, the Obama campaign didn't pay street money to the Democratic City Committee
OMG - Obama didn't do it!!! Alert the press!!

So are you saying that he's darned if he does and darned if he doesn't?

Oh that's right. It's Obama.
post #13 of 27
10/24/08 at 9:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
If it is, then everyone is doing it.
So, that makes it right?

Maybe, check out Bruce's signature.
post #14 of 27
10/25/08 at 7:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
So, that makes it right?

Maybe, check out Bruce's signature.
Of course it doesn't make it right! But; it does make it hypocritial to point out someone else doing it
post #15 of 27
10/25/08 at 7:37am
Oh, did McCain do it? If not, then it is not hypocritical in my book.
post #16 of 27
10/25/08 at 8:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Oh, did McCain do it? If not, then it is not hypocritical in my book.

I don't know. Has he not? According to some of the pro-McCain posts in the Palin's wardrobe thread, some of the party money is set aside for "Get out the vote" (street money) programs.

So, he has money specifically for that purpose. Has he used it? Who knows?
post #17 of 27
10/25/08 at 12:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
I don't know. Has he not? According to some of the pro-McCain posts in the Palin's wardrobe thread, some of the party money is set aside for "Get out the vote" (street money) programs.

So, he has money specifically for that purpose. Has he used it? Who knows?
If you don't know, then how can you say " it does make it hypocritial to point out someone else doing it"?
post #18 of 27
10/25/08 at 1:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
If you don't know, then how can you say " it does make it hypocritial to point out someone else doing it"?
The same way several people here are coming up with the biggest part of their ideas, by making extreme assumptions based on vague and imcomplete evidence. The money is there for that purpose. Are you saying that I should assume it will never be used?
post #19 of 27
10/25/08 at 3:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
The same way several people here are coming up with the biggest part of their ideas, by making extreme assumptions based on vague and imcomplete evidence. The money is there for that purpose. Are you saying that I should assume it will never be used?
So you're justifying your previous answer by saying that you're making extreme assumptions based on vague and incomplete evidence. Ok.
post #20 of 27
10/25/08 at 4:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
So you're justifying your previous answer by saying that you're making extreme assumptions based on vague and incomplete evidence. Ok.
Well exactly That's about all that's going on with all these threads. It's actually kind of fun too. Like the one about Obama knows an old radical, so it's completely obvious that they've been in his basement, eating Russian caviar, drinking Polish vodka and plotting the overthrow of the western world That is exactly the same kind of extreme assumptions I'm talking about. Pure spectulation based entirely on vague evidence and lots and lots of paranoia
post #21 of 27
10/25/08 at 4:18pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Well exactly That's about all that's going on with all these threads. It's actually kind of fun too. Like the one about Obama knows an old radical, so it's completely obvious that they've been in his basement, eating Russian caviar, drinking Polish vodka and plotting the overthrow of the western world That is exactly the same kind of extreme assumptions I'm talking about. Pure spectulation based entirely on vague evidence and lots and lots of paranoia
Glad to see you get such enjoyment out of what some of us consider to be valid questions about a candidate's associates.
post #22 of 27
10/25/08 at 4:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
Glad to see you get such enjoyment out of what some of us consider to be valid questions about a candidate's associates.
My pleasure

I agree that it was a valid question, about 3 months ago, and the first few hundred times it was brought up. Now it's just bordering on funny

But to be fair, I also feel that trying to label McCain a racist because of some yahoo at his rally yelling tripe is just as silly
post #23 of 27
10/25/08 at 5:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Well exactly That's about all that's going on with all these threads. It's actually kind of fun too. Like the one about Obama knows an old radical, so it's completely obvious that they've been in his basement, eating Russian caviar, drinking Polish vodka and plotting the overthrow of the western world That is exactly the same kind of extreme assumptions I'm talking about. Pure spectulation based entirely on vague evidence and lots and lots of paranoia
I haven't read any posts where people have made those kind of extreme assumptions. Do you have links to support that?
post #24 of 27
10/25/08 at 6:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I haven't read any posts where people have made those kind of extreme assumptions. Do you have links to support that?
Merely my perception, the visual image I get when reading some of these posts. It's really no different than having the perception that someone is a "thug" or a "lemming".
post #25 of 27
10/27/08 at 8:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Merely my perception, the visual image I get when reading some of these posts. It's really no different than having the perception that someone is a "thug" or a "lemming".
Amen! I've thought this for months now. "A" finds a link to discredit McCain, "B" goes out to find one to discredit Obama, then "C" goes to find another one to discredit McCain, then "D" finds another one against Obama - ad nauseum. Most of the links are not even credible and are slanted to whichever way the writer is leaning. "Assumptions" have been running rampant.

I said earlier that I came for the entertainment and it still holds true.
post #26 of 27
10/28/08 at 8:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Amen! I've thought this for months now. "A" finds a link to discredit McCain, "B" goes out to find one to discredit Obama, then "C" goes to find another one to discredit McCain, then "D" finds another one against Obama - ad nauseum. Most of the links are not even credible and are slanted to whichever way the writer is leaning. "Assumptions" have been running rampant.

I said earlier that I came for the entertainment and it still holds true.
There's a Carl Sagan quote that totally reminds me of these election debates...

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time someting like that happened in politics or religion."

OK, thread hijack over. I don't even remember what this particular one is about.
post #27 of 27
10/28/08 at 3:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Going Nova View Post
OK, thread hijack over. I don't even remember what this particular one is about.
Does it matter anymore?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
This thread is locked  
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Greasing the palms