Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama is Top Recipient of Political Cash from BP, Goldman Sachs, Defense Contractors, Pharma

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
merkins Donating Member (309 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:19 PM
Original message
Obama is Top Recipient of Political Cash from BP, Goldman Sachs, Defense Contractors, Pharma
I truly think there is no greater issue before us then getting money and corrupt lobbying out of government:

Politico reports:
BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama apparently also got more contributions from Exxon and Chevron than McCain.

Obama had the most political contributions from Goldman Sachs in 2008 of all senators. And Goldman gave more to Obama than any other presidential candidate, and was Obama's second-largest contributor.

In addition, Obama was the top congressional recipient of defense industry contributions for the 2008 election cycle. See this, this and this.

Obama was also the top recipient of money from the healthcare giants in the presidential election.


Via


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. numbers going down -- truth hurts? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Or we, like media matters, are just familiar with how full of bullshit Politico is.
Edited on Thu May-06-10 05:36 PM by SemiCharmedQuark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FSogol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. Ohhhh, according to the GOP he's the most liberal socialist communist on our planet.
Who gives a F' how Politico spins their BS. The donations to him were when he ran for the Senate, not during his Presidential run. And what does McCain have to do with anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jezebel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. Obama is the top money recipient of everyones money. Makes sense. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. Everybody knew the Democrat was going to win.
So they allocated accordingly. And it was not hard to figure that the first black man trumped the first white woman and the white men weren't even a close third. It was self-congratulations on superior virtue every step of the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. And the Republican accepted public funds,
so he didn't get any money.


Folks might want to see if we can figure out who funded the 527s that attacked Barack Obama
relentlessly during the general election, with those Rev. Wright ads that were running all the way to election day over and over again. perhaps that should be something to look at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. This thread is a talking point from the RW blogs, which ignore the fact that
republicans have been doing it also, long before Obama came to office

Why do they highlight Obama, if not to create a thread to bash him

If it were truely objective then they would condemn the whole process in general


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. two wrongs don't make a right
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. Politico. Meh. Contributions from employees are NOT contributions from BP, et al.
I prefer news from legitimate sources.

Politico and its very excitable BP-Obama reporting



May 06, 2010 9:12 am ET by Eric Boehlert

Trolling for a Drudge link, here's how Politico played up findings about oil giant BP and its campaign contributions over the years:

Obama biggest recipient of BP cash
Lede (emphasis added):

While the BP oil geyser pumps millions of gallons of petroleum into the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama and members of Congress may have to answer for the millions in campaign contributions theyve taken from the oil and gas giant over the years.

Kind of interesting, right? Politico has no idea if Obama will have to answer for the campaign contributions. (i.e. Did he do anything wrong?) And Politico can't find anybody in the entire article demanding that Obama answer for the contributions. Yet Politico builds an entire article around the premise that Obama might have to do so-and-so.

Meanwhile, Time's Michael Scherer highlights the obvious (intentional?) lack of context in Politico's reporting:

more at link: http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005060004


A related story at New York Magazine: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/05/obama_has_to_answe...

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. Obama was the "top recipient" of we the people. I wonder what the breakdown is...
of people, by employer. Everytime I made a contribution, I had to list my profession, and my EMPLOYER. So, this doesn't surprise me in the least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
branders seine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. co-inky-dink?
or sumpfin' more?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindandSoul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
9. Yes! Isn't it wonderful than in spite of all those donations. . .Obama is demonstrating
that he has not been bought?

There is a change for you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. Obama is the top recipient of cash from pretty much everyone. No one has raised more in HISTORY.
And this meme has been torn apart for the bullshit it is at least 3 times in the past week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
11. Mega-Bundlers Up Financing Ante
"The Public Citizen study found about 200 mega-bundlers. Public Citizen applied the mega-bundler category to those who were identified as bundlers by either presidential candidate and had solicited at least one contribution of $10,000 or more from a co-worker or member of their household for a candidate's joint fund-raising account.

Donors are allowed to give as much as $70,000 to the accounts. The accounts legally skirt fund-raising limits because the money doesn't go directly to candidates. Instead, it is split in legal-size chunks between national and state political parties that then spend it on behalf of the presidential candidates.

...Sen. Obama and his supporters have touted a big infusion of small-dollar online donors as a sign that the spirit of campaign-finance reform was alive and well. But Sen. Obama had 119 mega-bundlers, according to the study.

Among them was John Arnold, an executive with Texas-based energy hedge fund Centaurus Energy LLC, who raised $176,000 for Sen. Obama from himself and six people. He declined to comment.
Chris Pohlad rounded up $170,000 for Sen. Obama from himself and six people at PepsiAmericas Inc. Mr. Pohlad, who left the company to joint the Obama campaign, declined to comment."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584462604899359.html


The money that talks policy wise is from industry and lobbyist bundlers. Individual donations added up to quite a bit but the amount couldn't even buy us a public option.

When you start taking a look at the money to congress, to borrow a line from george carlin, "it's fucking horrifying".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. In addition there is NO required public accounting of bundled donations.
There is a reason for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. speaking of bundling: Obama got $10.2 mill from Wall Street Bundlers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. Candidate Obama collected the most money because he ran the longest....
because McCain accepted public funds for the General Election,
and so he couldn't accept donations. In fact, McCain had to return
General Fund donations.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/04/john-mccain-re...


The amount of money that we are talking about don't even make a dent in the funds
Pres. Obama received......but of course, that isn't what's important if Politico
can hit him over the head with it, and the media can follow, and then others.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
15. Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawm!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
16. Employees of those Companies - which are big with lots of employees - gave a lot of $$$ to Obama
because everyone gave him a lot of $$$ during the campaign.

Everyone does realize that whoever you work for is listed as WHO gave him $$$ - even though the Companies didn't, their employees did from their own checking accounts or credit cards.

I wish people would chill the f#$k out and figure out what that means. It isn't those companies accounts.

I wish we had public financing of elections. We don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
17. K & R!
I intend to study the entire thread in detail later on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
18. So who do you think corporations are going to donate their money to, the losers?
You are right about campaign reform, which incidently the Supremes have effectively given unlimited advertising for corporations to do through third parties for or against a candidate

This isn't Obama fault as the MSM are implying, this was in place long before he came aboard

but of course that is the talking point of the right wing as though they are innocent of such contributions

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VMI Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
19. And no public option.
Hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ncteechur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
21. So? Takes money to win. Unless there is something sinister going on, stop insinuating that there
is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merkins Donating Member (309 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
22. re: Politico
I see a number of comments raking Politico over the coals, and in that regard I whole-heatedly agree that Politico is a douche-bag outfit started up with right-wing cash. But if you would take the time to read the sentence below 'Politico reports' you will see that Politico is quoting the Center for Responsive Politics. Unless your goal is an attempt to be an apologist for the facts or an attempt at misdirection, feel free to add your critique of the Center for Responsive Politics .. I'm all ears.

I also notice the people carping about Politico fail to note that every source and cite in the post does not originate with Politico. They are: the Center for Responsive Politics, the Washington Post, opensecrets.org, and CNN.

Stick with the facts please if your going to debate the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Guess you don't get it.
Edited on Thu May-06-10 09:56 PM by FrenchieCat
There is no story, and that's Politico's flaw in what you posted.

$71,000 in contributions from BP employees who work for a multi-billion dollar company
during an entire two years of campaigning, when compared to 750,000,000 million
raised in total contributions is not a story.

In fact, the figure actually is ridiculous in context,
and yet the headline and the lead insinuates
something nefarious.

And to top it off, there are many stories happening
that might be worth writing about, but this ain't it....
not even close.

That's what makes Politico a fucking rag and a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #22
32. Your bull crap has been disproved numerous times.
I can only suspect that you have ulterior motive for posting this crap. It is employees of the company or industry that are making the donations, they could be Republicans, Democrats, Independents or what ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
26. Both parties are OWNED by the Corporatists.
Anyone who thinks national elections change anything are delusional. Real change can only occur locally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merkins Donating Member (309 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. sounds about right...
A bunch of millionaires run for office of either party in this country and their main allegiance is to their corporate sponsors for wealth and continued power. They may as well dress up in Nascar-like uniforms with all their corporate sponsor's logos stitched proudly on them for all to see and admire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ipaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. The proof is in the pudding.
We've had thirty years and still counting of union busting, stagnant wages, increasing gap between rich and poor, continued stripping of the social safety, off-shoring, tax cuts for the rich, deregulation and on and on.

Bundling isn't about checking to see where folks work and adding up the donations under their companies name.

Bundling is a specific activity separate from regular individual small donations. It is the main way corporations funnel large sums of money to candidates.
It's amazing folks don't know what bundling is or why it happens, either that or they have very short memories. abramoff and ken lay ought to ring some bells.


Published on Monday, July 14, 2003 by the Washington Post
Bush 'Bundlers' Take Fundraising to New Level
by Thomas B. Edsall and Mike Allen

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0714-05.htm


Barack Obama (D)
Bundlers

Bundlers are people with friends in high places who, after bumping against personal contribution limits, turn to those friends, associates, and, well, anyone who's willing to give, and deliver the checks to the candidate in one big "bundle."

Even though these donors direct more money to the candidates than anyone else, disclosure can be spotty, with Obama and McCain posting bundlers by ranges, indicated in this chart with the "max" and "min" columns, and with the top ranges being simply "$500,000 or more." Together, 536 elites have directed at least $75,750,000 to McCain, and 560 have gathered at least $76,500,000 for Obama.

http://www.opensecrets.org/PRES08/bundlers.php?id=N0000...

Notice the use of the phrase "at least". Bundling is exempt from disclosure rules. We don't know the total amount given to Obama or any candidate nor from whom.



"Discussing the issue of campaign finance reform, Obama said, 'The argument is not that I'm pristine, because I'm swimming in the same muddy water, ... The argument is that I know it's muddy and I want to clean it up," Barack Obama said August 16, 2007, in Des Moines, Iowa.


http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama...

Except as with gay rights, the public option, offshore drilling, health ins. mandate, nafta etc. the change isn't happening.



Statement of Laura MacCleery,Director of Public Citizens Congress Watch Division

We are all running in reverse when it comes to the role of big money donors in the 2008 presidential campaign. While bundlers are becoming more ubiquitous in campaigns, public information about donors and their contributions grows ever more elusive.

In 2004, George Bush, John Kerry and Howard Dean, in a voluntary but standard practice, disclosed bundlers names and provided basic data about how much money each raised, announcing when they exceeded thresholds such as $50,000 or $100,000.

In the current election, every major contender for the Democratic or Republican nomination is using bundlers. Yet the campaigns are being far less transparent about the bundlers than the 2004 field was. Anyone willing to be less transparent than George Bush should realize this is a problem.

Only one candidate, Barack Obama, has provided any insight into how much his bundlers have raised, and only one candidate also Obama currently publishes bundlers names on a readily accessible part of the campaign Web site. But even Obama comes up short because he does not identify bundlers employers or states of residence information needed, for example, to cross-check the data with lobbying records or connect records to previous bundling activity.

http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?...


Another Batch of Obama's Ambassador Picks Have Money-in-Politics Ties

President Obama's fifth consecutive week of naming new ambassadors brought with it five people with long histories of donating campaign cash, including two donors who also bundled more than half a million dollars each for the president's campaign war chest. As Capital Eye previously detailed, these choices often include people who contributed significant amounts to his committees and bundled larger sums his direction.

By our count, Obama, to date, has nominated 50 individuals for ambassadorships. Of these, 19 have been career officers in the Foreign Service, 26 have given money to political candidates and five are not career diplomats but nor do they have known histories of campaign contributions.

http://209.190.229.100/news/2009/07/another-batch-of-ob...



That is just the president. When you look at congress the money numbers are staggering.


Top Five Lobbyist Bundlers Revealed; Four Worked Exclusively for Democrats

http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2048 /


As far as transparency, they talk a good talk but when it comes to the walk, it's a joke.

New Lobbyist Bundler Database Not Yet Searchable

The 2007 law requires that, to the greatest extent practicable, the FEC makes the lobbyist bundler disclosures publicly available through the Commission website in a manner that is searchable, sortable, and downloadable. However, the scanned forms are stored in non-searchable PDF formats, are in no way indexed by bundler name, and are, in some cases, barely legible or handwritten. There is no easy way to search or sort by an individual bundlers name. Instead, each disclosure form is organized by campaign committee, requiring database users to spend hours examining the forms one by one. For the Centers recent story listing the top five lobbyist bundlers, the FEC data had to be manually typed into a spreadsheet for analysis.

The statute also explicitly requires that the FEC link the database to the lobbying disclosure forms on the websites of the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives. Yet, while there are links on the FECs Lobbyist Bundling overview page, there is currently no linking to those or any other disclosure databases on the search page.

http://www.publicintegrity.org/data_mine/entry/2047 /


I don't know where people got the idea that bundling was just matching small individual contributions to their respective workplaces. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
29. cool, he took their money now he's fucking with them.. love Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
31. How many times are going to see this bull crap post?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Mar 30th 2017, 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC