"J A" <ae@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Z9ydnTlGhKLaMffVnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Why did you change what I wrote: "Something like 80 pct of Obama's
> contributions are less than $100, to "The fact is that 80 percent of
his
> "individual" contributions are less than $100"?
>
> Or were you trying to say something else?
>
>
> First of all, what is your source for the data you give below? The
> numbers
> are different than even Brooks gives in a current editorial.
>
> Second, everybody has to work someplace, and in some industry and for
> some company or organization.
>
> Clinton and McCain also raise money from all those categories - just not
> as
> much.
>
> Why can't McCain raise as much or more money from these same
categories,
> from numerous small doners?
>
> Third, few of the people in any of those categories, anywhere, had heard
> of
> Obama a year ago.
>
> Are you saying that numerous small contributors on the internet actually
> weren't the main source of Obama's donations over the last year, during
> his
> rise from obscurity as a freshman Federal Senator?
>
> If so, the press and the people have been lied to and misled - you
should
> turn your data over to the Federal Election Commission immediately so
that
> legal action can be started.
>
> That is, unless this is just the usual Swiftboat lying and spinning...
>
>
>
>
> "Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:6cu20cF1ihr5vU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>> "J A" <ae@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:j7GdnSV6te31H_TVnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> "D. Spencer Hines" <panther@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:2yeak.300$LE.697@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> June 20, 2008
>>>>
>>>> Op-Ed Columnist
>>>> The Two Obamas
>>>>
>>>> By DAVID BROOKS
>>>
>>> Brooks a sly slimy neocon. The only thing he excels at is at twisting
>>> the
>>> truth.
>>>
>>> In the Illinois legislature, "Present" counts as a vote in terms of
>>> increasing the number of "ayes" that it takes to pass a bill.
>>>
>>> In practice there, "Present" means you want to further
negotiate/ammend
>>> the
>>> bill before giving an aye.
>>>
>>> Campaign finance and public funding came into being to stop the
practice
>>> of
>>> a small number of big money contributors buying elections and
>>> politicians.
>>>
>>> Something like 80 pct of Obama's contributions are less than $100.
>>>
>> \
>> Surely you don't honestly believe that crap.
>>
>> The fact is that 80 percent of his "individual" contributions are less
>> than $100.
>>
>> Individual means the common or garden variety of contributor such as
you
>> or I.
>>
>> It is also a fact that the top industries sup****ting his campaign have
>> bundled the following:
>>
>> Lawyers/Law Firms - $20, 173, 458
>> Securities and Investment - $9, 078,803
>> Education - $7, 540,288
>> Real Estate - $5,509, 969
>>
>> Then Cor****ate
>>
>> Goldman Sachs $571,330
>> University of California $466,410
>> UBS AG $364,556
>> JPMorgan Chase & Co $364,157
>> Citigroup Inc $360,304
>> National Amusements Inc $322,050
>> Lehman Brothers $319,147
>> Harvard University $315,624
>> Google Inc $309,714
>> Sidley Austin LLP $294,445
>> Skadden, Arps et al $278,163
>> Time Warner $264,977
>> Morgan Stanley $260,376
>> Jones Day $249,375
>> Exelon Corp $236,211
>> Latham & Watkins $220,865
>> Wilmerhale Llp $220,230
>> University of Chicago $219,707
>> Microsoft Corp $206,942
>> General Electric $206,579
>>
>> You might wish to ask yourself why he has declined to take public
>> financing
>>
>>
>>
>> Hint
>>
>>
>> Because he can raise more money from special interests - that why.
>>
>> Nigel Brooks
>
>
>
>
i love the wingnuts,
this is the first election the dems have had more money so we get howls of
outrage from the right of "big money" buying the election.
now mccain is crying about clark pointing out being a POW is not a
presidential qualification and the wingnuts sy a person's service record
is
nor fair game, swiftboaters anyone?
and mccain has caled for obama to jettison and curb others from getting
involved when he himself declared he had no control over the wingnut 520s.
hypocracy is not enough a word for the republicans.
|
