Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 232

Thread: Firm gives $1 million to pro-Romney group, then dissolves(edited)

  1. #131
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    How is this kind of thing any different than an outright bribe?
    Well, there is no agreed upon quid pro quo, so it isn't a bribe per se. The problem with it, and the reason it's different from buying a car, is that it creates an appearance of impropriety, and an obvious risk that the beneficiary of the donation may feel obligated to perform some service for the donee in the future. It isn't just like buying a Bugatti; it's like buying a Bugatti and giving it to a politician.

    Some people will give large donations just because they favor a candidates positions, with no expectation of favors. But human nature being what it is, other people will clearly expect some return on their investment, and some politicians will be happy to do favors in exchange for future support.

    The question is, should we allow this system to exist, given the rather high risk of corruption? Free speech? I thought that's why we had elections. One man one vote and all that....

  2. #132
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,773

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    1Perry,

    So, you really have no problem with "ghosts" sending money to front-companies for the sole purpose of funneling money to a particular political party or candidate? You don't find anything unethical about this practise?

    You really don't see how the voices of average Americans are being drowned out by corporate elites? As I said previously to illustrate the point, I alone at my current income level can't contribute $1,000,000 to a political campaign nor candidate of my choice, but 1,000,000 Americans working together could giving $1/ea. However, a corporation like W Spann, LLC can make a $1,000,000 donation and never have to be accountable for that contribution because as this example in questionable ethics proves said corporation could simply vanish by going out of business and no one will have the opportunity to question their records and ask, "Who made the contribution?"

    Don't you see how problematic this is? Or is it okay with you that the "power of the vote" by the people can be usurpted by the corporate elites?

    IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS, YOU MAY AS WELL NOT SHOW UP AT THE BALLOT BOX COME NOVEMBER 4, 2011 BECAUSE YOUR VOTE HAS ALREADY BEEN BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY CORPORATE AMERICA COUTESY OF THE SUPREME COURT COURT (Re: Citizen's United).

  3. #133
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,773

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    So moveon.com was nothing but a bribe to Obama? Of course it wasn't. Sure they expect things but you expect things by voting.

    I might put a sign out front stating "Vote for Candidate A" is that a bribe? If I have enough money I might buy 10,000 signs because I really like candidate A and want others to show their support for him. Is this a bribe?
    A corporation providing financial support (i.e., campaign donations) to a particular candidate or a PAC in and of itself isn't a problem. It's when they mask who the figure-heads of the corporation actually are then close their doors and run and hide that makes it a problem. Such actions tells me there's something very underhanded taking place here. We should all be questioning it, not excusing it by hiding behind "freedom of speech" or "liberty" to do as one pleases. If it's unethical, it's wrong and should not be allowed. PERIOD!

    You want to know why this is important to me? It's very simple...

    Congress is already deeply aligned with corporate lobbyist. And many politicians are bought and paid for by wealthy individuals or heavily sponsored by corporations and/or hedge fund managers, etc. The power - or voice - of the People is constantly being eroded and folks like you don't seem to care. We speak, but seldom does Congress act on our behalf. I mean, here we have a national economic crisis with one side trying to do things to correct things (and for all practical purposes, the economy was tracking upward as far as the markets were concerned until mid-July when the GOP just had to have things their way), and now look at where we are? We're going backwards, not forward. And the very people who helped set things in reverse are themselves backed by corporate interest - the very same interest who just hide the identity of those who donated $1,000,000 to a GOP PAC that supports the very side of the political dividide that has our economy once again headed DOWNWARD!

    If you're not upset about this you're a damned fool!!!
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 08-05-11 at 02:38 PM.

  4. #134
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    So moveon.com was nothing but a bribe to Obama? Of course it wasn't. Sure they expect things but you expect things by voting.

    I might put a sign out front stating "Vote for Candidate A" is that a bribe? If I have enough money I might buy 10,000 signs because I really like candidate A and want others to show their support for him. Is this a bribe?
    Again, the lefties here have expressed support for limiting donations (and sometimes eliminating donations) no matter what the source. It seems all you have is partisan straw man arguments like "but, but, they do it too!"
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  5. #135
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Well, there is no agreed upon quid pro quo, so it isn't a bribe per se. The problem with it, and the reason it's different from buying a car, is that it creates an appearance of impropriety, and an obvious risk that the beneficiary of the donation may feel obligated to perform some service for the donee in the future. It isn't just like buying a Bugatti; it's like buying a Bugatti and giving it to a politician.
    Indeed it could create an appearance of impropriety. That would show bad upon the candidate. Not a reason to curtail ones rights though. Allowing the KKK have a rally in the local city park makes the city look bad but there is nothing one can do about it.

    It boils down to this. Rights are not always pretty but it beats the alternative.

    Some people will give large donations just because they favor a candidates positions, with no expectation of favors. But human nature being what it is, other people will clearly expect some return on their investment, and some politicians will be happy to do favors in exchange for future support.
    With the answer not being that we should stop those with pure motives.

    The question is, should we allow this system to exist, given the rather high risk of corruption? Free speech? I thought that's why we had elections. One man one vote and all that....
    High risk? I'd say it's rather low. Too risky.

  6. #136
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    So moveon.com was nothing but a bribe to Obama? Of course it wasn't. Sure they expect things but you expect things by voting.

    I might put a sign out front stating "Vote for Candidate A" is that a bribe? If I have enough money I might buy 10,000 signs because I really like candidate A and want others to show their support for him. Is this a bribe?
    Nope. But if you conceal your identity, thus eliminating all transparency into the relationship you have with the candidate, I think that would raise a few eyebrows.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 08-05-11 at 02:32 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #137
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    1Perry,

    So, you really have no problem with "ghosts" sending money to front-companies for the sole purpose of funneling money to a particular political party or candidate? You don't find anything unethical about this practise?
    Indeed I would have a problem there. That's illegal.

    You really don't see how the voices of average Americans are being drowned out by corporate elites? As I said previously to illustrate the point, I alone at my current income level can't contribute $1,000,000 to a political campaign nor candidate of my choice, but 1,000,000 Americans working together could giving $1/ea. However, a corporation like W Spann, LLC can make a $1,000,000 donation and never have to be accountable for that contribution because as this example in questionable ethics proves said corporation could simply vanish by going out of business and no one will have the opportunity to question their records and ask, "Who made the contribution?"
    Yes, you have no idea where this money came from. Maybe it is $1 from 1 million people. I already noted why I support being able to do this. Pay backs are a bitch. Again, ask P.P.

    Don't you see how problematic this is? Or is it okay with you that the "power of the vote" by the people can be usurpted by the corporate elites?
    I dismiss that arguement. Soros spent a ton of money in the last election but still lost. The swiftboaters were nothing but a small organization but they had a major impact in the 2004 elections. Obama didn't win in 2008 because he spent the most money.

    Do you believe the record amount of money skewed the election results or did they logically play out? IMO if "big oil" had gave McCain $500 million under the table, he still loses. Are you disagreeing?

    IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS, YOU MAY AS WELL NOT SHOW UP AT THE BALLOT BOX COME NOVEMBER 4, 2011 BECAUSE YOUR VOTE HAS ALREADY BEEN BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY CORPORATE AMERICA COUTESY OF THE SUPREME COURT COURT (Re: Citizen's United).
    You'll have to speak for yourself here.

  8. #138
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    A corporation providing financial support (i.e., campaign donations) to a particular candidate or a PAC in and of itself isn't a problem. It's when they mask who the figure-heads of the corporation actually are then close their doors and run and hide that makes it a problem. Such actions tells me there's something very underhanded taking place here. We should all be questioning it, not excusing it by hiding behind "freedom of speech" or "liberty" to do as one pleases. If it's unethical, it's wrong and should not be allowed. PERIOD!
    On the flip side the "underhanded" actions may come from the other side. Would you say that the attacks on P.P. funding would be happening right now if they were able to keep their support for one candidate or the other more secret?

  9. #139
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Nope. But if you conceal your identity, thus eliminating all transparency into the relationship you have with the candidate, I think that would raise a few eyebrows.
    Raise them. Ask questions. Demand that the government does their job in enforcing it's laws.

  10. #140
    Advisor Polotick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    08-17-11 @ 10:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    374

    Re: Super PAC's try end around

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Raise them. Ask questions. Demand that the government does their job in enforcing it's laws.
    Problem.

    The lawmakers are the foxes watching the henhouse.

Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •