world

Obama urges action on campaign finance bill

18 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

18 Comments
Login to comment

Nothing new here. Republicans and their money. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"If President Obama and Washington Democrats are truly focused on creating jobs, we should take action immediately to stop all of these impending tax hikes"

I read in my newspaper today that U.S. consumer confidence is down because of the impending tax hikes.

Obama and the Democrats are focused only on creating more government jobs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The republicans have had 8 years of these wonderful tax cuts. They have downsized, stashed $Millions and done nothing to stimulate the economy or create jobs.

After knowing they would end, they continue to complain even after we see the depth of the country's debt.

The republicans want to fill their rich pockets and to hell with the country. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Democrats have controlled Congress for almost 4 years, the White House for almost 2 years.

Question: Is the economy and the U.S. government financial situation better now than it was 4 years ago?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And you believe that if we deprive the budget of these taxes it'll make things so much better?

Banks got bailouts and they hold on to the money and don't make loans.

$$Millions of dollars stashed and no hiring going on.

Considering the challenges we've faced, we could be a hell of a lot worse.

Yeah, we're better off then if we had had a republican elected president. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "I read in my newspaper today that U.S. consumer confidence is down because of the impending tax hikes."

No doubt... it's a shame the Republicans are saying no to extending the tax cuts and therefore are in favour of increasing taxes. If they weren't threatening to filibuster the extension, Americans like yourself wouldn't have such consumer confidence woes.

What we are seeing again is the Republican tantrums and childish denial of reality. The Dems could propose that Republicans be given a million dollars each and the GOP would say 'no' simply because of their inane need to oppose anything the Dems bring up. Half the time it's about things they actually agree with or supported under the moron bush, but they suddenly oppose because the Dems are in power. You see it all the time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

After 10 long years, Sarge still has absolutely no idea of the damage his 2 votes for bush have helped cause.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama has lost all credibility.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

After all this time, Sushi still has no idea of the damage the Democrats and Obama have done.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In contrast, the Supreme Court ruling “protects the First Amendment rights of organizations across the political spectrum

That Supreme Court ruling has to be one of the biggest loads of #$#%$ in decades. Corporations exist only because they are given special legal protection by government to exist. They are a creation of government, and as such have no basis for attempting to turn around and influence it. If the corporation's owners, or more likely management want to influence government then they had that right as private citizens already. Also, if corporations have the same rights as people, then why don't people get the same rights as corporations. I'm sure lots of people would like to enjoy the benefits of claiming to be "domiciled" In the Grand Caymens or some other island paradise tax shelter. But no surprise to see the ideological fools at the Chamber of Commerce take that position.

And somebody should tell Mr. Josten and all the other deficit "hawks" to chill it a little. While it would be nice to live in a perfect world where governments balance their budgets it ain't going to happen in this one. Balanced budgets are things for politician to talk about, not to do anything about. Reality is a balanced budget would smash the US economy and send it into a deflationary spiral. Lots of powerful folks in the US know that very clearly. If the Hawks keep acting like they are serious, somebody may be given a little talking to, and if that fails they might have a little "accident" or a little scandal like Elliot Spitzer had.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Isn't it amusing, that here is Obama, always preaching about moving the country forward, and yet what he is trying to convince people to do, is turn back the clock. And not just turn back the clock, but to stifle freedom of speech for certain groups, but not for others. Unions obviously need to be protected, but companies and corporations obviously must not be. Hell, you apply the same rules to unions that most private companies labor under, and they would run out of cash almost immediately.

GJDailleult - That Supreme Court ruling has to be one of the biggest loads of #$#%$ in decades...

Did you even read the ruling? I don't mean what Obama said in his state of the union where he basically lied about it, but the ruling itself. Please, go ahead and look at it. I'll even provide the link.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf

This is all about freedom of speech. Thats it. The governments attempt to stifle it was overturned. Your claim about corporations is nonsense by the way. Unless you are perhaps living in communist Russia, they are not a creation of government, they don't exist because governments allow them to, or at least they don't as much as you or I or anyone does. And even if your argument was true, there are more then a few other agencies and organizations existing under similar situations, that have no burden placed on their freedom of speech. Indeed, there are parts of the government itself that lobbies to influence the government. Why is it so terrible, for a corporation to inform citizens, that a particular candidate or position, would have serious repercussions on their business? Thats what Obama is so worried about. Thats why even today, the Obama administration is clamping down on health insurance providers, to prevent them from telling people that the reason their rates are going up, is because of Obamacare.

Reality is a balanced budget would smash the US economy and send it into a deflationary spiral.

Do you really still believe in Keynesian economics? What will it take to convince you that it does not work? If you are still believing in it even after the failure of Obamas Porkulus Maximus bill, I seriously doubt there is anything that will convince you otherwise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From the opinion, I particularly liked this line...

Political speech is “indispensable to decision making in a democracy, and this is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation.” This one was very good as well.

Premised on mistrust of governmental power, the First Amendment stands against attempts to disfavor certain subjects or viewpoints or to distinguish among different speakers, which may be a means to control content. The Government may also commit a constitutional wrong when by law it identifies certain preferred speakers. There is no basis for the proposition that, in the political speech context, the Government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers.

What they are saying, is that companies, have a right to speech as well. Not just people, not just unions, not just certain acceptable factions and groups within and without the government, but corporations as well. They can be subject to some limitations, but not a wholesale denial of speech.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir: "...and yet what he is trying to convince people to do, is turn back the clock."

I like that you are quoting Obama as you attempt to deride him (with the 'turning back the clock' bit). :)

"Republicans devoted their weekly address to promoting a GOP plan to freeze government spending and stop tax hikes scheduled to take effect next year unless Congress intervenes."

And yet they are the ones who are stopping the continuation of tax cuts by threatening to filibuster... go figure! As usual, the GOP doesn't know it's behind from a hole in the ground.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For once smithinjapan seems to have a genuine insight on US politics - Republicans are turning back the clock - to when blacks voted Republican.

And Obama's disastrous bungling of the economy is helping.

Rand Paul has 37 percent of the Black vote in Kentucky. I love the look on the faces of my Canadian and European friends (and the furtive i-phone search by some of them) when I tell em that one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

MisterCreosote: "For once smithinjapan seems to have a genuine insight on US politics - Republicans are turning back the clock - to when blacks voted Republican."

This isn't the thread on Obama encouraging 'blacks' to get out and vote.

"And Obama's disastrous bungling of the economy is helping."

He was handed a disaster and is dealing with it, which is no easy matter.

"Rand Paul has 37 percent of the Black vote in Kentucky. I love the look on the faces of my Canadian and European friends (and the furtive i-phone search by some of them) when I tell em that one."

Which means that he doesn't have 63% percent, doesn't it? Doesn't matter what nationality you are when you point out that fact -- it's still going to be denied and the subject changed because Republicans can't deal with the truth. And anyway, like I said the other day, you've proven that non-Americans have better insight into US politics than Americans such as yourself do. Thank you for that, I guess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see the predictable comment here about "Keynesian" economics. There is no Keynesian economics happening in the USA, just a lot of nonsense from people who have no idea what he wrote and said. If he were alive today he would think what a bunch of idiots Americans are for doing what they have done the last 30 years.

Also, a corporation has no existence without government permission to exist. It is a creation of government and the legal system, to say that it has a right to exist on the same level as the people who gave it that right is insane.

And about "the failure of Obamas Porkulus Maximus bill". Guess they don't teach the concept of negative numbers in the USA anymore. Government spending is there because that is what keeps the money from disappearing and going to money heaven, as that scumbag Icelandic banker put it. It is not "Keysianism", it is "saving rich guys buttism". At it will continue. Because it is in the interest of the Federal Reserve for it to continue. And the Treasury Department, and whichever party is in power, and Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan, and every bank, hedge fund, and private equity fund in America. They will let Rand Paul and Palin and the Tea Party ramble on about it as that is good for giving the impression that America is a democracy, and keeping various wings of the Republican party happy and excited. But if any of those politicians ever gets close enough to power to make spending reduction and a balanced budget a reality, they will be dealt with, and it will be nasty and quick. Guaranteed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He was handed a disaster and is dealing with it, which is no easy matter.

And the fact that he's an incompetent bungler doesn't help any either. Especially considering he has only made the problems worse.

Which means that he doesn't have 63% percent, doesn't it? Doesn't matter what nationality you are when you point out that fact -- it's still going to be denied and the subject changed because Republicans can't deal with the truth

Blacks are a monolithic voting bloc. Normally 90% of them vote Democrat. That a Republican candidate has managed to break that, and attract 30% of them is a huge change.

Also, a corporation has no existence without government permission to exist. It is a creation of government and the legal system, to say that it has a right to exist on the same level as the people who gave it that right is insane.

Based on your theory, you could also claim that unions, and for that matter people, only have existence because of "governmental permission", or more accurately government recognition. Forgive my being dubious of such lunacy. However, even if you go out on a limb and accept that premise as valid, why should unions or other groups and organizations falling in the same category be allowed free unfettered speech, while it is denied to corporations, merely because of their corporate identity? Does being a corporate identity preclude it from having rights? Based on more then a century of case law, it does not.

They will let Rand Paul and Palin and the Tea Party ramble on about it as that is good for giving the impression that America is a democracy, and keeping various wings of the Republican party happy and excited. But if any of those politicians ever gets close enough to power to make spending reduction and a balanced budget a reality, they will be dealt with, and it will be nasty and quick. Guaranteed.

Ok, I'm not going to debate economic theory with you in a thread on campaign finance reform, apart from simply saying, public sector spending is a leech, taking money from the private sector, and redistributing it to where politicians think it ought to go. This does not help the economy. In fact it has a negative impact. The more this occurs, the larger the public sector that the private sector has to sustain, the more dynamic and powerful the economy must be in order to prop it up. And economic theory aside, your paranoia about the people in power, rather undercuts your credibility.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of the money, By the money, For the money, is getting a society nowhere near prosperity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites