RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:42 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:32 am 
Offline
Policy Wonk

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 3868
Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) has announced that she will not longer accept campaign donations from Corporate Political Action Committees (PAC).

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/38 ... -pac-money.

She told the host's of the New York Radio Program, "The Breakfast Club" that she had been caught off-guard when asked at a town hall about accepting Corporate PAC Monney.

So I’ve actually made a decision since I’ve had that conversation that I’m not going to accept corporate PAC checks,” Ms. Harris added.

Ms. Harris will join Senators Corey Booker (D-NJ), Kristen Gilibrand (D-NY), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Bernie Sanders, (I-VT.) in refusing to accept Corporate PAC Money.

We’re all supposed to have an equal vote but money has now really tipped the balance between an individual having equal power in an election to a corporation,” said Ms. Harris.

Senator Harris is among the Democrats being mentioned as a possible 2020 Presidential Candidate.

Personally, I do not think she will run in 2020, I think she knows she is not ready for the White House, much like Elizabeth Warren who refused to run in 2016. Ms. Warren and Mr. Booker have been mentioned as possible contenders in 2020.

_________________
Glenfs posted about the Left's War On Women. Glenfs posted this after the Cosby Verdict "Gloria Allred is a media hound and an asshole. The most dangerous place to be is inbetween her and a microphone or camera". 04/27/2018.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:36 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3322
none of the citizens united schemes are good for our democracy.

This PAC wants to help you 'fire' your member of Congress

Quote:
A new campaign political action committee aims to get ineffective incumbents out of office in the 2018 midterm elections and beyond.

Fire Your Congressman is a nonpartisan campaign fundraising organization that wants to help elect new candidates that normally wouldn't have a chance against powerful incumbents.

Founder Norbert Richter decided to start Fire Your Congressman after he considered running as a primary challenger against Rep.Ted Yoho, R-Fla. Richter said he found that the party inhibited challengers to the sitting representative by restricting fundraising opportunities and chances to engage with the incumbent in debates.

"A challenge to an incumbent is something very frowned upon and discouraged," Richter said. "If both parties are discouraging involvement and primary challengers of the candidates... the representation starts to fail, and we're witnessing that right now."

Richter's main goal, he said, is to bring accountability to Congress.

People can donate money to a "pool" that works against a specific member of Congress. You can also donate to a general fund that targets five Democrats and five Republicans that are determined to be the highest priority to fire, based on an algorithm.............

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 11:56 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 10073
Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) has announced that she will not longer accept campaign donations from Corporate Political Action Committees (PAC).

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/38 ... -pac-money.

She told the host's of the New York Radio Program, "The Breakfast Club" that she had been caught off-guard when asked at a town hall about accepting Corporate PAC Monney.

So I’ve actually made a decision since I’ve had that conversation that I’m not going to accept corporate PAC checks,” Ms. Harris added.

Ms. Harris will join Senators Corey Booker (D-NJ), Kristen Gilibrand (D-NY), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Bernie Sanders, (I-VT.) in refusing to accept Corporate PAC Money.

We’re all supposed to have an equal vote but money has now really tipped the balance between an individual having equal power in an election to a corporation,” said Ms. Harris.

Senator Harris is among the Democrats being mentioned as a possible 2020 Presidential Candidate.

Personally, I do not think she will run in 2020, I think she knows she is not ready for the White House, much like Elizabeth Warren who refused to run in 2016. Ms. Warren and Mr. Booker have been mentioned as possible contenders in 2020.


It seems like a report which firms up the possibility that she will run in 2020 rather than one which indicates she will not.

She knows Sanders will run with this being his signature talking point virtue, wearing it like a halo. And he will slime anyone else who hasn't inoculated themselves.

She's got the base to do it.


I've already sent her some money and I will send her more. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:00 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 10073
none of the citizens united schemes are good for our democracy.

This PAC wants to help you 'fire' your member of Congress



It sounds like he's trying to infect Democrats with this as well as Republicans. I hope Norbert falls in a Florida swamp. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:21 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 11186
Location: Sunny South Florida
Yay. Another algorithm. And who gets to see the source code for the algorithm they're using? Who's writing it?

Plus, they're going to give their challengers a test! Who's writing it, what questions are on it? Why only test their challengers on knowledge of civics, and not other subject areas? How about ignorance of science, computing, human evolution, climate?

[from the article]
According to the PAC, it will consider factors such as poor attendance, low numbers of bills sponsored and co-sponsored, time on committees, conflicts of interest, the time served in Congress and involvement in scandals. Any time of Congress after 20 years of service will count against lawmakers in the algorithm, Richter said. Seniority is not, however, the primary factor.

Yeah. Dunno about this. On the one hand, they've got a point. Incumbency has its advantages, that's definitely true, and it makes the struggle tougher for challengers. I get that point. But now that we're at the devil of details, this bugs me for the same reason term limits initiatives do.

They seem to acknowledge seniority has its advantages in Congress. The longer you're there, the more likely you are to head committees. Plus, you build up working relationships and knowledge of how to utilize the system. So, of course, after 20 years, we want you out of there ?!?! Look, I love this citizen Congress idea, it was never supposed to be a career blah blah blah ... but this idea that we can fix corruption merely by limiting the amount of time people serve is foolish. They could actually be dedicated to public service, such people exist. Plus, if the corrupting influences and system remain the same, it's not like new people won't do all of the same crap.

Don't like this idea, especially because they are going to hide behind an algorithm. Computer says you must go. They don't even have an ideology beyond getting rid of incumbents in either party. And I don't see that as a good thing. I would want to know what they've stood for, not just how long they've been there. And scandals? Is the algorithm going to utilize alleged scandals, or Ethics comm. proven scandals? Etc. I see a lot of flaws.

If you want to get rid of corrupt Congressmen, I would target their constituents and provide evidence of their corruption. Their opponents usually do that. That most people return their incumbents is a psychological flaw.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2018 10:17 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3322

It seems like a report which firms up the possibility that she will run in 2020 rather than one which indicates she will not.

She knows Sanders will run with this being his signature talking point virtue, wearing it like a halo. And he will slime anyone else who hasn't inoculated themselves.

She's got the base to do it.


I've already sent her some money and I will send her more. :)


the hard part of this will be following through. If she does that I have no doubt she will get better at it. hope so

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 1:23 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:46 pm
Posts: 5098
Location: Treasure Coast, Florida & Fairfield County, Connecticut
:arrow: I guess she won't be going to anymore of those high class fundraisers in the Hamptons?

_________________
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.
~Franklin D. Roosevelt~


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 10:05 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3322
Enbridge pipes political money to Michigan Chamber's effort to fight ballot initiatives

Quote:
Oil transport giant Enbridge, owner and operator of the controversial underwater Line 5 oil pipeline in the Straits of Mackinac, has also taken a deep plunge into Michigan politics.

The company is the largest bankroller in this election cycle of a Michigan Chamber of Commerce political action committee focused on ballot questions. And that PAC, in turn, has funded another Chamber PAC currently working to stop a proposed November ballot initiative that seeks to change how Michigan creates its political boundaries, a review of state campaign finance reports shows.

Both Enbridge and Chamber officials, however, say the amount and timing of Enbridge's contributions, and the Chamber PAC's subsequent efforts in opposition to the redistricting initiative, are unrelated.

"What the heck?" said David Holtz, communications coordinator for Oil and Water Don't Mix, a coalition opposed to Line 5's continued operation in the Straits, upon discovering Enbridge's political contributions.

Enbridge spokesman Michael Barnes denied Monday that the company has entered the redistricting fray.

“Enbridge does not have a position on the Michigan redistricting ballot initiative and further Enbridge has contributed no dollars toward any efforts to support or oppose this initiative," he said in an email to the Free Press.

Campaign finance records filed with the Michigan Secretary of State's Office show Enbridge made two contributions to the Michigan Chamber of Commerce PAC II last year, $125,000 on Oct. 9 and an earlier contribution of $1,650 on June 1. That October payment far exceeded any other contributor in the 2018 election cycle; the next-highest was Amway Corp.'s Stephen Van Andel's $50,000 contribution on April 3 of this year. Enbridge's $126,650 represents more than half of Chamber PAC II's total contributions from all sources so far, a total of $242,450.

Secretary of State records further show Chamber PAC II then made a $35,000 contribution to another Chamber-affiliated political action committee, Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution, on Oct. 12, three days after Enbridge's large contribution. The PAC is presently leading the opposition to the Voters Not Politicians group's efforts to place a redistricting initiative on the November ballot.

On Feb. 6 of this year, Chamber PAC II made another, $100,000 contribution to ...........

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 11:23 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 10073
I'm reading headlines like, "McCain urges Senate to reject Haspel's nomination"

Rand Paul is also days he won't vote to confirm her. And apartnety other Senate Republicans are concidering wheather they'll vote for her too.

The reason I'm putting this in the current Kamala Harris thread is because based upon what McCain says it would appear to me it was Kamala Harris's line of questioning of Haspel in committee which moved McCain to decide to urge the Senate to reject Haspel's nomination.

Harris did good. :)



Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but there's something which irritates me about these Senate Republicans (MEN) finding this convenient reason for talking about rejecting Haspel's nomination. I know damned good and well that if Haspel were a man those same Senate Republican men would be going Yup Yup Yup to her nomination.

:(

Not that I ought to be complaining, but I am sort of complaining.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 12:46 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 16633
:arrow: I guess she won't be going to anymore of those high class fundraisers in the Hamptons?


Meaning what

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 1:26 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 10073

Meaning what


About a year ago Harris was hosted at Michael Kempner's house in the Hamptons. It wasn't a fundrasier event but it was a meet and greet with individuals who donate a lot as individuals to Democrats.

Kempner raises a lot of cash for Democrats, especially for Obama and later for Clinton. That event was seen as a sign that Harris is running for President and she's got a chance.

Kempner and the others she met at his house are individuals with the limits on their donations the campaign laws allow, not corporate PACS. So her pledge to not take corporate PAC money doesn't apply to these Democratic party supporters and fundraisers.




I'm sure Sanders would sneer and say how awful. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 9:02 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 16633

About a year ago Harris was hosted at Michael Kempner's house in the Hamptons. It wasn't a fundrasier event but it was a meet and greet with individuals who donate a lot as individuals to Democrats.

Kempner raises a lot of cash for Democrats, especially for Obama and later for Clinton. That event was seen as a sign that Harris is running for President and she's got a chance.

Kempner and the others she met at his house are individuals with the limits on their donations the campaign laws allow, not corporate PACS. So her pledge to not take corporate PAC money doesn't apply to these Democratic party supporters and fundraisers.




I'm sure Sanders would sneer and say how awful. :roll:


Yeah I remember the conniption fits over that. She was being crowned princess or benighted by the corporate dems or whatever. :problem:

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 9:18 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:01 pm
Posts: 15470
I'm sure Sanders would sneer and say how awful. :roll:


The handy part of being an alleged "independent" is that it provides one with the opportunity to sneer at pretty much everybody. And Bernie takes full advantage of it. Meanwhile the idiots at the DNC say, "Yeah...sure Bernie, we're thrilled to have you run for president as a Democrat. Just be nice to us." :roll:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 11:05 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 12047
:arrow: I guess she won't be going to anymore of those high class fundraisers in the Hamptons?

If she needs their money to win I hope she goes every week.

_________________
Nothing I say to you cons will matter. You could see tape of Rump shooting 5 yr old children at some fantasy ranch in the Bahamas, and you would not drop your support for him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 1:15 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 16999
If she needs their money to win I hope she goes every week.


She will still take the money
Only in a less direct manner.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2018 6:04 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36018

She will still take the money
Only in a less direct manner.

And it's fine for Trump and his folks to take all kinds of Russia money. You don't care about the Republicans, you know they are all corrupt but you vote for them anyway.

_________________
glenfs, July 4, 2018:

"You would think that after 8 years of hearing allegations against Bill C and another 8 against President Obama you people would have learned that 90% of those types of allegations just aren't true."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 6:48 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 16999
And it's fine for Trump and his folks to take all kinds of Russia money. You don't care about the Republicans, you know they are all corrupt but you vote for them anyway.


and the 100's of millions the Clinton Charity received from foreign powers had nothing to do with buying influence.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 6:52 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36018

and the 100's of millions the Clinton Charity received from foreign powers had nothing to do with buying influence.

Thanks for proving my point. You're only concerned about the Clintons. Pure hypocrisy.

_________________
glenfs, July 4, 2018:

"You would think that after 8 years of hearing allegations against Bill C and another 8 against President Obama you people would have learned that 90% of those types of allegations just aren't true."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:00 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 16999
Thanks for proving my point. You're only concerned about the Clintons. Pure hypocrisy.


Zero self awareness, Clinton's received 100's of millions and that you defend. Proving that you are only concerned when it is a Republican receiving foreign money. How odd that as soon as the Clinton Crime Family were no longer in a position of influence the donations ended and the charity closed.

Is Trump corrupt, hell yes, are the Clinton's as corrupt you betcha.

As for this Sen Harris move if she is serious about a WH run and is on the ticket there is a 100% certainty that her campaign will be receiving PAC money in one way or another. Didn't Obama at one time make a similar promise about his campaign? I don't have time to look it up and I am sure your "selective amnesia" will kick in but, wasn't he going to use the public funding. Then once he became a viable candidate changed course.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:04 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36018

Zero self awareness, Clinton's received 100's of millions and that you defend. Proving that you are only concerned when it is a Republican receiving foreign money. How odd that as soon as the Clinton Crime Family were no longer in a position of influence the donations ended and the charity closed.

Is Trump corrupt, hell yes, are the Clinton's as corrupt you betcha.

As for this Sen Harris move if she is serious about a WH run and is on the ticket there is a 100% certainty that her campaign will be receiving PAC money in one way or another. Didn't Obama at one time make a similar promise about his campaign? I don't have time to look it up and I am sure your "selective amnesia" will kick in but, wasn't he going to use the public funding. Then once he became a viable candidate changed course.

All of the Clinton money went into charity, and was used for those purposes. Hell, it was such a good thing that the Bush's helped them raise money!

But all those payoffs the Republicans receive are perfectly acceptable to you.

_________________
glenfs, July 4, 2018:

"You would think that after 8 years of hearing allegations against Bill C and another 8 against President Obama you people would have learned that 90% of those types of allegations just aren't true."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:08 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36018
This is the hypocrisy of the right.

The Clinton had a charitable foundation. glen's theory is that money given to that charity, which is used to fight things like hunger, was an immoral influence buying scheme.

But money given DIRECTLY to Republicans to simply enrich them? No, on influence buying there!

But money directly into Trump's pocket? Everyone flocking to hold huge events at his overpriced hotels? His entire pay-to-play scheme?

No big deal. glen's always been silent on that.

_________________
glenfs, July 4, 2018:

"You would think that after 8 years of hearing allegations against Bill C and another 8 against President Obama you people would have learned that 90% of those types of allegations just aren't true."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:10 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 16999
All of the Clinton money went into charity, and was used for those purposes. Hell, it was such a good thing that the Bush's helped them raise money!

But all those payoffs the Republicans receive are perfectly acceptable to you.


It was still peddling influence and if you truly believe that charity wasn't used directly or indirectly to fill the pockets of the Clinton's you are very naïve. So they are the Robin Hood of modern crime, taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:12 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36018

It was still peddling influence and if you truly believe that charity wasn't used directly or indirectly to fill the pockets of the Clinton's you are very naïve. So they are the Robin Hood of modern crime, taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

No, glen, it wasn't. None of the Clintons even took a salary from it. But you KNOW the Clintons are crooks, so facts don't matter to you. You just make it up as you go.

_________________
glenfs, July 4, 2018:

"You would think that after 8 years of hearing allegations against Bill C and another 8 against President Obama you people would have learned that 90% of those types of allegations just aren't true."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:12 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 16999
This is the hypocrisy of the right.

The Clinton had a charitable foundation. glen's theory is that money given to that charity, which is used to fight things like hunger, was an immoral influence buying scheme.

But money given DIRECTLY to Republicans to simply enrich them? No, on influence buying there!

But money directly into Trump's pocket? Everyone flocking to hold huge events at his overpriced hotels? His entire pay-to-play scheme?

No big deal. glen's always been silent on that.



http://www.hangthebankers.com/clinton-c ... oundation/

10 facts about the Clinton Foundation, now I am off to work.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 12, 2018 7:14 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36018


http://www.hangthebankers.com/clinton-c ... oundation/

10 facts about the Clinton Foundation, now I am off to work.

Nice conspiracy website. Where did you find it, infowars?

_________________
glenfs, July 4, 2018:

"You would think that after 8 years of hearing allegations against Bill C and another 8 against President Obama you people would have learned that 90% of those types of allegations just aren't true."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group