John F. Kerry

- "Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people? Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said today that the President is “absolutely not” resetting the legislative process for health care. If the starting point for this meeting is the bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate.

- "Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation? As the President has noted recently, Democrats continue to hold large majorities in the House and Senate, which means they can attempt to pass a health care bill at any time through the reconciliation process. Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation would represent an important show of good faith to Republicans and the American people.

- "If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand? Our ability to move forward in a bipartisan way through this discussion rests on openness and transparency.

- "Will the President include in this discussion congressional Democrats who have opposed the House and Senate health care bills? This bipartisan discussion should reflect the bipartisan opposition to both the House bill and the kickbacks and sweetheart deals in the Senate bill.

- "Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion? As you may know, legislation has been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures, similar to the proposal just passed by the Democratic-controlled Virginia State Senate, providing that no individual may be compelled to purchase health insurance. Additionally, governors of both parties have raised concerns about the additional costs that will be passed along to states under both the House and Senate bills.

- "The President has also mentioned his commitment to have “experts” participate in health care discussions. Will the Feb. 25 discussion involve such "experts?" Will those experts include the actuaries at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), who have determined that the both the House and Senate health care bill raise costs – just the opposite of their intended effect – and jeopardize seniors’ access to high-quality care by imposing massive Medicare cuts? Will those experts include the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has stated that the GOP alternative would reduce premiums by up to 10 percent? Also, will Republicans be permitted to invite health care experts to participate?

- "Finally, as you know, this is the first televised White House health care meeting involving the President since last March. Many health care meetings of the closed-door variety have been held at the White House since then, including one where a sweetheart deal was worked out with union leaders. Will the special interest groups that the Obama Administration has cut deals with be included in this televised discussion?Of course, Americans have been dismayed by the fact that the President has broken his own pledge to hold televised health care talks. We can only hope this televised discussion is the beginning, not the end, of attempting to correct that mistake. Will the President require that any and all future health care discussions, including those held on Capitol Hill, meet this common-sense standard of transparency and openness?

This list - coupled with some pointed remarks by the Republican rank and file Monday - don't bode well for bipartisan cooperation. Boehner and Cantor also remind Obama that they first invited him to hold a bipartisan health care discussion back in May - an invitation the president rejected.

"Since then, the President has given dozens of speeches on health care reform, operating under the premise that the more the American people learn about his plan, the more they will come to like it," Boehner and Cantor said in the letter. "Just the opposite has occurred: a majority of Americans oppose the House and Senate health care bills and want them scrapped so we can start over with a step-by-step approach focused on lowering costs for families and small businesses. Just as important, scrapping the House and Senate health care bills would help end the uncertainty they are creating for workers and businesses and thus




.....


if he answered all those i guarentee u we would have broad bipartisan healthcare reform before summer. so the ball is really in your court obama. whats it gonna be? the republicans say they have been waiting since may to have this debate with u, ill bet they are pretty well prepared and it should be interesting to watch and tivo.

__________________
Nasa under Obama

Grieves

So who/where did you steal/borrow those from?

I can tell, because they are actually concise, well thought out and mostly grammatically correct, which are far from being your strong points. The evidence is in your trailing paragraph, it's all "i, u, u's, etc"...

__________________

John F. Kerry

thanks dude u post much more relevant and uplifting shit so often that u definately should be talking.

__________________
Nasa under Obama

Grieves

Thank you...I know that I do...It means a lot coming from you, though...But alas, you are sidestepping again...Care to cite your sources for once?

__________________

Being

*calmly waiting*

__________________
R.I.P. Gov

Being

I love how it states as fact that all of America doesn't like current proposals. Quite the contrary, there is quite a movement that has made the effort to do research, as all information about proposals can be found, and wish it would pass as it is.

__________________
R.I.P. Gov

~1~

Oh wait, what?


This time we get to see live bi-partisan political finger fucking?

It's all a joke, a dog and pony show to make the public think the politicians really give a fuck about the people who are keeping them rich.

If they meant it, the call would be for widespread health insurance company reform, as it stands now they are the only ones who are looking to benefit on politicians making the health and well being of their people a commodity to be traded on the open market.

__________________

AK47

The real issue is nor health care, but health insurance. There needs to be some real change in how it exists today. The thing I think is really blocking it is congress. The Democrats like to give lip service to progressive aspirations while remaining as much in the back pocket of K. St as any republican, and the GOP loves to quote their mantra of "values" while having as many mistresses, and being just as self serving as the Dems. Praying out of one side of their mouths, and preying out of the other.
Meanwhile the rest of us just pray we do not get sick, because it will financially destroy us. But what do any of them care. They already have the best form of socialized medical attention possible.

John F. Kerry

well i gotta say that todays meeting was perhaps the single most uplifting, entertaining, englightening, refreshing, and hopefull thing ive seen our executive and legislative braches of government do in many years.


u know america as the worlds oldest democracy has a lot of shit to uphold.


we are like a walking civics lesson for less developed and less sophisticated democracies around the world.


what have they seen for 10 years? gridlock, deadlock, fighting , and wars...


ok not too great, but what did they see today?

well, assuming anybody watched it (and it was the main article on bbc website so i know some did) they saw what it was like to be in a closed door meeting between rival politicans- except that this one happened to be open door, so that instead of falling back onto party lines and bs the various people had to really back their shit up and defend their positions and defend against attacks etc etc...

what did I personally come away from this with ? well to be honest, i came away with a variety of feelings.


one is that both sides generally believe in the shit they say, or at least they believe in what they say, to a certain extent, its not all just bloviating etc.


I gotta say honestly that watching like 4 hours of this today I really got the sense that the democrats (or at least the moderate ones like Tom Harkin ) really care about needy people, politics is almost like a calling for them, they are in it to help those people without power and without a voice. and frankly , i know some of u might be surprised to hear me say this, for one of the first times in a long time i really got the feeling that at least some of the democrats are trying to do the right thing and trying to do whats right for the people of america. i know, i know, but wait....


so i also got the feeling (altho i knew this comming in) that many in the gop believe that structrually the idea of making healthcare a government administered thing is a bad idea and that in the long run, it would make healthcare worse not better. I think they did a pretty good job of explaining that. but in some sense, polls have shown, etc, most americans already agree with that so in some ways the gop had an easier job to do today.


honestly some emphasis on SOME of the democrats really impressed me today. their job was to put forth their ideas in a way that convinces people their ideas are good. I think they did that to a more effective extent than any other time ive heard them talk abourt this issue today.


But, the problem that remains is clear. The democrats want to help people, or i believe that at least some of them generally want to help people, not all, but some. Now the gop wants to help people too (or at least some of them do as well).

what do i think? basically what i said from the beginning when some conservatives here said we should just let the poor rot, I think that if we really took half gop ideas and half dem ideas and put em together we would have something that actually might do a shitload of good for our country. frankly, i worry that doing EVERYTHING that one side wanted to do would be bad- i dont wanna radically change healthcare in america. But the simple fact that I saw today how heartfelt some of the dems feelings are and how they represent people in america who need help just like the gop represents people who dont want gov't interference, I got the feeling that if the dems watered it down and took out the public option and let private healthcare be in charge , that then the gop should support a meeting in the middle to subsidize a large number of those poor people who really cant afford healthcare.

now i get the feeling that neither side will let the pieces fall in such a nice fashion, and so i dunno what will happen next. but honestly, i think this meeting today will be a historical event that people can look at to see intricasies of how our government works, and how well meaning people from both sides are still capable of getting together and having a substantive discussion about how to improve the country they and we share.


any thoughts anyone?

__________________
Nasa under Obama

John F. Kerry

its pretty crazy to think that anybody is one shitty phonecall away from being one of these statistics, and i think we should do something about that.

i still dont think the something should be what the dems want to do,


but i guess i do now think we should do something.


thats not to say that i think reconcilliation to do only the dem proposals would be better than nothing, its to say that i think we should do something bipartisan with wide support and if we dont, or if we do only the dem thing, i think we will have made a big mistake.

__________________
Nasa under Obama

DdC

Entity

Through the listing of actual corporate contributions over a period of 20 years, the Dems are owned by the corporations -- including such biggies as the defense industries, the media, the car manufacturers, and Wall Street -- every bit as much as the Repugs are, and even more at many times.

First, let's explode the myth that key industries like defense, telecom, media, health care, pharma and Wall Street, are solidly Republican.

2008 Presidential campaign

Health Services/HMO's:

Contributions to:
Barack Obama $1,4235,501
John McCain $427,228

Pharmaceuticals:

Barack Obama $2,124,560
John McCain $665,422

Now let's look at the figures for all races, for the years 2009-2010:
Contributions from Health Professionals:
Donations to Dems $13,827,356
Percentage of total to Dems 55%
Donations to Repugs $11,116,261
Percentage of total to Repugs 45%

HMO contributions:

Total $$3,792,002
Percent to Dems 66
Percent to Repugs 33

Now let's look at Insurance:

Donations to Dems $7,265,653
Percentage of total to Dems 52%
Donations to Repugs $6,515,832
Percentage of total to Repugs 47%

Then let's look at Pharmaceuticals:

Donations to Dems $5,064,428
Percentage of total to Dems 57%
Donations to Repugs $3,746,465
Percentage of total to Repugs 42%

figures for just Congressional races, 2009-2010

Number 2 is Health Professionals:

Total contributions: 15,370,571
Percentage to Dems 62%
Percentage to Repugs 37%

Number 6 is Insurance

Total contributions $9,864,471
Percentage to Dems 57%
Percentage to Repugs 43%

Number 10 is Pharma/Health Products

Total contributions $6,405,127
Percentage to Dems 61%
Percentage to Repugs 39%

Now, let's demolish the myth that "all the major industries, such as defense contractors, Wall Street, car manufacturers, and telecoms, are solidly and consistently Republican". The actual campaign contributions for the 2009-2010 election cycle (as before, these figures include PACS, 527's, individual contributions and soft money contributions) show otherwise:

Defense industries:

Total contributions $8,777,667
Percentage to Dems 57
Percentage to Repugs 42

Defense Aerospace:

Total contributions $3,858,141
Percentage to Dems 58
Percentage to Repugs 41

Defense Electronics:

Total contributions $2,895,255
Percentage to Dems 56
Percentage to Repugs 44

Auto manufacturers:
Total contributions $302,668
Percentage to Dems 63
Percentage to Repugs 37

Telecoms:
Total contributions $3,498,621
Percentage to Dems 55
Percentage to Repugs 45

Wall Street:

Securities and Investment companies:
Total contributions $30,193,682
Percentage to Dems 63
Percentage to Repugs 36

Venture Capital companies:
Total contributions $3,214,175
Percentage to Dems 73
Percentage to Repugs 23

Mortgage bankers:
Total contributions $895,870
Percentage to Dems 54
Percentage to Repugs 46

Hedge Funds:
Total contributions $2,940,746
Percentage to Dems 61
Percentage to Repugs 39

Oil and Gas:
Total contributions $9,449,321
Percentage to Dems 32
Percentage to Repugs 67

And that brings up another myth that too many Democratic activists want to believe--the idea that "most of the major corporate industries year after year support the Repugs and oppose the Dems"
Campaign contributions for 1994 (when the Dems were in power), 2004 (when the Repugs were in power) and 2010 (when the Dems are again in power) show, across a wide range of industries, a very tight correlation between "party in power" and "party that receives more support"--almost invariably, each party receives more when it is in power, and less when it is not:

Industry: Aerospace Defense
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 59
Percentage to Repugs 41

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 39
Percentage to Repugs 60

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 59
Percentage to Repugs 41

Industry: Airlines
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 63
Percentage to Repugs 37

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 38
Percentage to Repugs 61

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 59
Percentage to Repugs 41

Industry: Auto Manufacturers
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 47
Percentage to Repugs 53

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 35
Percentage to Repugs 65

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 63
Percentage to Repugs 37

Industry: Mortgage Banks
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 64
Percentage to Repugs 36

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 35
Percentage to Repugs 65

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 54
Percentage to Repugs 46

Industry: Cruise Lines and Cruise Ships
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 64
Percentage to Repugs 36

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 49
Percentage to Repugs 51

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 85
Percentage to Repugs 15

Industry: Defense Contractors
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 59
Percentage to Repugs 41

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 38
Percentage to Repugs 62

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 58
Percentage to Repugs 42

Industry: Defense Electronics
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 60
Percentage to Repugs 40

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 39
Percentage to Repugs 61

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 57
Percentage to Repugs 43

Industry: Drug Manufacturers and Pharmaceuticals
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 40
Percentage to Repugs 60

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 31
Percentage to Repugs 69

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 54
Percentage to Repugs 46

Industry: HMO's and Health Care Providers
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 63
Percentage to Repugs 37

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 43
Percentage to Repugs 57

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 67
Percentage to Repugs 32

Industry: Insurance
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 44
Percentage to Repugs 56

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 32
Percentage to Repugs 67

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 53
Percentage to Repugs 47

Industry: Lobbyists
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 74
Percentage to Repugs 26

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 48
Percentage to Repugs 52

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 67
Percentage to Repugs 32

Industry: Telecomms
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 55
Percentage to Repugs 45

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 41
Percentage to Repugs 59

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 55
Percentage to Repugs 45

Industry: Securities and Investment
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 51
Percentage to Repugs 48

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 48
Percentage to Repugs 51

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 63
Percentage to Repugs 36

Industry: Steel Manufacturers
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 46
Percentage to Repugs 54

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 27
Percentage to Repugs 72

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 51
Percentage to Repugs 49

Industry: Oil and Gas
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 38
Percentage to Repugs 62

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 19
Percentage to Repugs 80

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 32
Percentage to Repugs 67

Industry: Agribusiness
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 40
Percentage to Repugs 60

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 28
Percentage to Repugs 71

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 47
Percentage to Repugs 53

Industry: Labor Unions
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 96
Percentage to Repugs 4

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 87
Percentage to Repugs 13

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 92
Percentage to Repugs 7

Industry: Motion Pictures
1994 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 90
Percentage to Repugs 10

2004 Elections (Repugs in power):
Percentage to Dems 86
Percentage to Repugs 14

2010 Elections (Dems in power):
Percentage to Dems 91
Percentage to Repugs 9

That, my friends, is the reality.

My apologies in advance to all the blue-pennant ideologues here who simply don't want to hear that or to believe it. Reality sucks. Get used to it. (shrug)



All of the campaign contribution information comes from OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting which is the website of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit nonpartisan group which tracks campaign contributions through the FEC and breaks them down by party, by year, and by industry. (I highly highly highly encourage everyone to spend a few hours poking around that site--it will show you many many things that you absolutely will not like.)

__________________
"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the scenes."
-- Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court

"Fifty men have run America, and thats a high figure."
-- Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.[/CENTER]

stoneric

Why wouldn't anyone believe it?

Entity

__________________
"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the scenes."
-- Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court

"Fifty men have run America, and thats a high figure."
-- Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.[/CENTER]

DdC

That, is the reality.

two to one GOPerverts are wholly owned by corporations.



Election Cycle Total

Total Contributions $325,092,179
Contributions from Individuals $122,096,127
Donations to Democrats $120,015,814
% to Dems 37%

Contributions from PACs $144,014,518
Soft Money Contributions $58,981,534
Donations to Republicans $204,058,401
% to Repubs 63%



CNN refuses to run pro-health reform ad.
Still think they're a "liberal" network?

Corporations That Supplied Iraq's Weapons Program 02/19/03

Lobbyists War Over Billions in Antidrug Aid 08/26/00

Entity

ahem

__________________
"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the scenes."
-- Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court

"Fifty men have run America, and thats a high figure."
-- Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.[/CENTER]

DdC

Its not always how much is donated as much as it is what they do with it. Presumptions that donations equates to actions only pan out with republickers. So krats take the money and oppose the very corporate dollars given... As I've been told, the majority of republicans think health care is a privilege and the majority of democrats think its a right. Same as fighting for the right to pollute or cage sick people for pot. Anti-American, hell anti human fascists and the trolls once again diverting from what actually matters. First year of Obama the corporate fossil fools are squealing like the pigs they are after total silence for 8 years of Boosh. Lapdogs take the money and obey. Outside of a few wingnuts and lieberman most dems took the money and still stood up for the peoples health care over the insurance fat cats. In spite of their masters wishes. Neocons and their trolls or Americans is the choice. Same fascism caging kids for pot and then the same right wing christian republicans sodomy deterrents for geeeeezus. That's sending the right message? Looks like same old shit. The GOP exists for corporate America and the Progressives exist to clean up after them.

Shocking Report Reveals Epidemic of Sexual Abuse in Juvenile Prisons

'Relax Your Muscles as Much as Possible'


This may be a bipartisan war but the republican majority has been the most ruthless and enthusiastic drug worriers to date. Taking food stamps and college assistance or mandatory minimum sentencing or enacting the Patriot Act and through Bidens lies, the DARE Act. So dems seem to mimic neocons as neokrats sometimes but ain't nearly as good at it or do they have a smidgeon of the connections to pull anything off like an Iraq war or 911. Klintoon had his Arkansas experience but mostly it seems clear Republicans are fascists and most Democrats are mice shaking in the corner, praying the GOPerverts don't fuck up any more of the country.

Entity

You can't be serious. If that were in ANY WAY true, the dollars from the Corps etc would dry up. Oh, and policy would be different.

Riiiiiiight. That's why Obama et all have rescinded proposals against Big Pharma, Insurance Companies and the Health Care Industry as pertains to the Health Care Bill.
Careful moving around in the bubble you live in. It may pop before you have a chance to become acclimated.

It's one big dog and pony show with major Corps as the ring master. (and the FED as the Owner of the property)
At any given election time you will have one party painted as the bad guys and the other as the good guys.
Depending on the issue those roles will flip flop with one fact remaining constant.
Corps win and the public loses.

ANYONE who still believes that these parties act independently is either a fool or just seriously mistaken.

Same as with war mongering, they need a "bad guy" to polarize the masses and institute what they want. Regardless of whether the "facts" about the issue even exist. (or hell.. if the ISSUE even exists)

__________________
"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the scenes."
-- Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court

"Fifty men have run America, and thats a high figure."
-- Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.[/CENTER]

Entity

Apparently, neither has ddc...

__________________
"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the scenes."
-- Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court

"Fifty men have run America, and thats a high figure."
-- Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.[/CENTER]

DdC

Your troll side tracking again. Your opinion is shit, why do you continue making stuff up and then referencing it. Corps dollars haven't dried up after 8 years of Boosh. Do you even read your dribble? You think dems started Iraq and push the Ganjawar? No, its the same neocons. Same global warmers you suck up too.

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson."
- A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, l933

careful using trolls links. I got a warning checking his sight through https://fecwatch.org.
SSL Server Certificate warning someone may be trying to intercept your communications going to opensecrets.org

Oh now its Obama, not the wingnut GOPerverts obstruction? You're a joke you're so hung up on these moneysluts. Just make shit up. Have you even read the health care thread? The Dick Armey and winggnut fascism stopped the health care reform. As stated last week, you seem more interested in bashing obama than reality. Racist? Go on admit it...

Center for Responsive Politics
OpenSecrets.org
Board of Directors

Robert A. Weinberger, Chairman. Former Vice President for Government Relations, H&R Block. ahem

Corporations That Own Our Media 03/14/00

OpenSecrets.org google

OpenSecrets.org Unveils Obama's Hidden Lobbyist Cronies edschultz

Bankrolling a Presidential Brand, Why Wall Street Needs Obama,
by Pam Martens who worked right in the belly of the Wall Street beast (Smith Barney?) until she was forced out and then sued them for sexual harrassment. I daresay she knows alot about Wall Street's dark side.

You always get the cart before the horse. The money buys the elections. In obama's case, he's a junior compared to 50 years of the Boosh klan from Ike to the present Halliburton Dyncorps exploitation. Or AIG and Enron. Look at your own slanted figures. Those reported to the elections commission are what makes up your list. Meaning another troll diversion from reality. Meaning those honest enough to report financing are the only ones on your list. If dems have higher numbers, doubtful. Then its because GOPerverts didn't report it. Look at what they advocate, not just their donations. Or just obombo when most of the progressives are pushing reform and most neocons are pushing for the status quo.

GOP Chickenhawk Deadbeats sticking Taxpayers with the bill

The American Lunatic Asylum

GOPerverts ARE the Oligarchy



I said remove all money from the courts, elections and legislature. But until that happens it takes money. You cover and divert for the lowlifes and shift blame to the reformers. Same weak cowardly acts as not saying a word about Blackwater and then bashing ACORN who's crime was loaning money to the lower incomes without huge interest. Or Apothecaries or Ganja and Hemp taking profits from the corporations. Buying legislation like the CSA. Its all fascism, thats a marriage between corporations and government. But government doesn't start wars to protect corporations. They start wars to exploit resources to profit corporations. Seeing the votes tells who stands with whom. Your garble is silly, just watch c-span you can see the republicans are wholly owned by the insurance companies.

How reliable do you think OpenSecrets.org is?
Citigroup and Goldman Sachs as the top contributors to both campaigns (Obama and McCain).

money reports
come out every three months or so, when laws mandate reporting this data. The FEC then posts these reports in raw form, and opensecrets OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting / then turns these docs into a usable database. This takes a while and means that months pass between site updates.

OpenSecrets.org Goes OpenData

review of opensecrets.org
The fundamental problem with any site relying on FEC data is that much campaign financing is controlled by groups using legal loopholes, such as issue advertising, to avoid putting any information on the public record...

but... Professors, upper level undergraduates and graduate students in such fields as political science, journalism and law would find the information at opensecrets.com valuable.

So it looks to me like open secrets are legit, but not totally accurate only using government data. But that doesn't stop troll girl from misleading us to believe it is. Its the GOPerverts with tax shelters in the Cayman islands. GOPerverts like Ollie North and Iran Contra. GOPerverts and the Ganjawar. GOPerverts starting Iraq and Afghanistan. No its not even at all. A small portion of dems are neokrats. The majority of republicans are neocons. GOPerverts start wars and progressives stop them, including the Ganjawar exposing Nixon's and Kissenger's lies. This is good...

OpenSecrets.org Launches New 'Revolving Door' Section 2/18/10
Opensecrets.org has remade its Revolving Door section. Featuring a new opening page, we're highlighting some of our most intreguing information and data about government officials who've become lobbyists -- and vice versa.

Oliver heads South

Kill the Messenger

Coming from a troll like you it doesn't sound as threatening. Yes gomer, both sides have practiced fascism. The GOP and the DNC Klintoon Gore. But that doesn't change the fact when Boosh runs the country to the ground and people try to fix it all they get is obstruction. You can't dismiss the destruction of Boosh Cheney by claiming they're all alike. Or that its hopeless and nothing can be done. Or typically of trolls, just make shit up or deny deny deny with evangelical science references. It was the republicker supremes granting unlimited funds. Its the republicker iran contra, kissenger's escalation in nam and the OPECkers bin laden and Boosh Carlyle are family. Yes some dems may get corporate funding as I said, a minority and when they do they act like republicans. So the progressives haven't sold out, just the fascists mostly republickers, some dems acting like GOPerverts. That doesn't make a very good case dude or chicky. Again you and Beck protest the protesters and side with the tyrants and oppressers. Typical.

STATE OF THE UNION: CORRUPT 02/02/02

Center for Responsive Politics
Major Foundation Funders ahem

Support for the Center comes from a combination of foundation grants and individual contributions. CRP does not accept contributions from corporations, trade associations or labor unions. You can support the work of the Center directly by contributing through OpenSecrets.org. The Center for Responsive Politics is grateful to the following donors:

# Carnegie Corporation of New York
$500,100
General support

# Ford Foundation
$190,000
General support

# Joyce Foundation
$187,500
To support the expansion and redesign of the Center for Responsive Politics' OpenSecrets.org Web site and Capital Eye electronic newsletter.

# Open Society Institute
$250,000
General support

# Pew Charitable Trusts
$800,000
General support

# Sunlight Foundation
$1.2 million
A 2009-2011 grant to provide CRP's data in downloadable form for non-commercial use, and to support databases on campaign finance, lobbying, 527s, personal financial disclosure and Washington's revolving door.

# Cloud Mountain Foundation
$10,000
General support

"...somebody has to take governments' place,
and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it."
- David Rockefeller - Newsweek International, Feb 1 1999

US Supreme Court crushes campaign finance restrictions
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas joined Kennedy in the majority opinion.



Corporate Predators th.. 03/31/02
"It's About Oil," by Ted Rall, San Francisco Chronicle,11/2/01.
Unocal Corporation, an American petroleum company, has been eyeing a pipeline deal to enable the delivery of crude from former Soviet republics to consumers in the West. Of course, this is what a company such as Unocal is expected to do. But the *geography* of the interest is what catches one's attention. Unocal's plan involves a pipeline from sources in Turkmenistan, to the sea port of Karachi, Pakistan. What lies between these two points? Afghanistan.

Corporate Predators thirdworldtraveler
by Russel Mokhiber and Robert Weissman
Common Courage Press, 1999

Barack Obama disinfo

Obama opensecrets

Obama declined public financing and the spending limits that came with it, making him the first major-party candidate since the system was created to reject taxpayers' money for the general election.



John McCain opensecrets



Ralph Nader



Corporation Nation
At a time when Wal-Mart's annual revenues outstrip those of 161 countries and Bill Gates' personal wealth is greater than that of 100 million Americans combined, Prof. Charles Derber (Sociology) warns, average citizens are losing control of their lives to a corporate ascendancy unmatched since the Gilded Age of the 19th century.



Slave Labor Means Big Bucks For U.S. Corporations 02/06/01
At the same time, the United States blasts China for the the use of prison slave labor, engaging in the same practice itself. Prison labor is a pot of gold. No strikes, union organizing, health benefits, unemployment insurance or workers' compensation to pay. As if exploiting the labor of prison inmates was not bad enough, it is legal in the United States to use slave labor. The 13th Amendment of the Constitution states that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted shall exist within the United States."