• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats took $1M from Foriegn-Affiliated PAC's

Are they equal? I mean this implies that all situations are equal. The media did not cover republicans in the vien that they were guilty. In fact, much of the coverage hurt Obama and democrats more than anything else. This is a much less sensational story as it is completely legal and not hidden. There's no secret here. Nothing illegal. Therefore, not a hot story. Any unbiased person understanding the nature of for profit journalism would not rate the two as equal.

Equal? Possibly not. But close enough where more coverage would have been appropriate, IMHO.

Your comments 'nothing illegal here' would make me think you feel there was somethign illegal going on with the CofC... however, 'no evidence' has been presented showing that to be the case.
 
Move along now... move along.
You do know that more people get their news from the Internet than from television, right?
 
Equal? Possibly not. But close enough where more coverage would have been appropriate, IMHO.

Your comments 'nothing illegal here' would make me think you feel there was somethign illegal going on with the CofC... however, 'no evidence' has been presented showing that to be the case.

Actually, what makes the other story more deserving, if that's the word we want to use, is because it has the accusatory element to it. That hypes the controvesy, which brings in viewers. If the accusations were provable, it would likely have an illegal element. but the story is about the attack, not the money donated. In a political season, this makes news, sadly.

There is such fire in this story. No accusation. Nothing not known. So, no element of mystery. Nothing anyone can find scandalous. It doesn't have the same ability to sell.
 
National Democrats have charged that a House candidate endorsed by a controversial anti-immigration group has “Nazi ties” — but six other congressional Democrats also have the group’s endorsement, and at least one has enthusiastically embraced its support.

The group, Americans for Legal Immigration, or ALIPAC, supports candidates and incumbents who oppose creating a path to citizenship for the thousands of undocumented immigrants in the United States. The Anti-Defamation League has criticized ALIPAC for what it says is support from white supremacist and racist groups.

“Another [National Republican Congressional Committee] Young Gun candidate, another Nazi tie — it should come as no surprise,” Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesman Andy Stone said in a statement Monday. He said the group was “on the racist fringe” and that it was “backed by anti-Semites and white supremacists.”

But six Democrats: Reps. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Gene Taylor of Mississippi, Pete DeFazio of Oregon, Mike McIntyre of North Carolina and Jim Marshall and John Barrow of Georgia, all have the group’s endorsement.

Group hit by DCCC backed 6 Dems - Kasie Hunt - POLITICO.com

of course, what would you expect from a national leadership that ACCUSES american citizens of ILLEGAL activity based on no more reason than "it appears" and "i can assert anything i want to, bob"

pathetic

why can't democrat candidates from arizona to new hampshire, from florida to alaska, talk about the NATIONAL ISSUES---jobs, debt, spending, obamacare, energy, taxes, afghanistan, the border...

why did the party punt on middle class tax cuts in favor of ADJOURNMENT?

seeya at the polls, progressives

two weeks from today!
 
Last edited:
Jeeez... didn't think I had to spell it out for you. I mean we not school children here.

Posting it on their website doesn't mean jack-ship pal. When the big three do an on-air story about this, get back to us. I won't be holding my breath though, because it doesn't conform to their pro-Messiah ideology, and they don't want to hurt the chances of their anointed one.

So lets move along people... nothing to see here.

Somehow I don't think you read the CBS story; maybe the headline or OP's distortion, but not the story itself.
 
Somehow I don't think you read the CBS story; maybe the headline or OP's distortion, but not the story itself.
I guess if it wasn't on television, it never happened. :shrug:
 
:lamo

increasingly i am of the opinion that if you were to study the lefts' attacks, whether it's Europe's attempts to accuse the US of being racist and imperialist or this latest gem of a chamber of commerce 'controversy' a hefty percentage of them would turn out to be nothing more than simple projection.

ah, sweet irony.


In the weeks leading up to the midterm elections, Democrats have assailed Republicans for taking money from outside interest groups they allege are funded by secret, foreign donors. However, the Democratic Party is taking its own large share of financing from groups backed by foreign companies, according to a new analysis.

Democrats this election cycle have received about $1.02 million from political action committees affiliated with foreign companies, according to The Hill and the Center for Responsive Politics....

The Democrats' charges were based on a report from a liberal blog, which said that the Chamber solicits foreign funding for its general account, which it uses to fund campaign advertising. Outside groups like the Chamber have financed campaign advertisements benefiting Republicans over Democrats by a margin of almost nine-to-one in recent weeks. The Chamber has vehemently denied, however, that any of its financing for campaign ads comes from foreign entities.

Democrats have tried to emphasize that, while they have no proof that these groups are using foreign money for their political activities, the point is that their political donors are kept secret.

"The overarching issue here is that we don't know where these entities are raising money," Doug Thornell, a spokesman for Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told the Hill. "It could be money from foreign corporation, big oil or companies that want to outsource U.S. jobs."

Nevertheless, American Crossroads hit back at Democrats for the apparent hypocrisy of their ads accusing conservative of taking foreign money.

"Barack Obama criticized the Supreme Court and his adversaries over the bogus charge of foreign money tainting elections - while leaders in his own party had taken more than a million dollars from the foreign cookie jar," Jonathan Collegio, a spokesman for American Crossroads, told the Hill.

I'm sure someone mentioned this - but I'll just point out that the GOP took just over $500,000

$1,000,000 for the Dems
$500,000 for the Reps

BOTH have garnished money from foreign sources - how much isn't *up to them to decide* - how much is determined by *the ones who are giving it*

So - what's your beef? That the Dems have been given more than the Reps?
Or that foreigners are giving monies towards our politics - period?

That's the world.

If something happened in my life that made me move to another country - I'd *give to the US, still* - and be classified as a foreigner donating money to ___.
If my family moved away they'd likely be the same way.

I've donated to foreign causes for various reasons - political, religious and otherwise . . . I see nothing wrong with others doing the same to us.
 
Last edited:
I guess if it wasn't on television, it never happened. :shrug:

I think his problem is that he read what was posted in the OP and didn't bother reading the story at the CBS website. The OP left out part of the story. Those damn ellipses.:doh
 
Back
Top Bottom