$$$$$$$$ Follow The Money $$$$$$$$$$

[Anti-Party]

Follow the money....it's that easy

Obama's top Corporate (and other) campaign donors and relevance;

1) 6 or more Universities...Obama fights for easier cheaper student loans.
2) Defense Contractors $1,189,216...We see Obama talk much differently about war then what he did extending Afghanistan, bombing Libya and now possibly bombing Syria
3) Kaiser Permanente (a healthcare provider)...During the battle of Obamacare, I'm sure this is significant. I haven't researched it yet. I do know the owner created HMO's
4) Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JP Morgan...Continued receiving Federal bailout money (but had enough to money to throw at a politician)
5) National Amusements...Owns CBS
6) Walt Disney... Owns ABC
7) Comcast...Owns NBC
8) US Government, US Department of Justice and US Department of Health&Human services are also top donors...The Governments way of making us pay for political campaigns
9) Wind Energy...Obama uses stimulus to pay for wind farms
10) Google...Google is one of the Corporations being paid to do work for the Prism program via Patriot Act
11) I can't find the Corporation right now but there was one that was owned by an openly gay owner who was a gay rights activist...And now we are talking gay rights

Links;
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?Ind=D
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/c...p?id=N00009638
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...?cid=N00009638

Note that before the Right tries to troll this, they should look up Romney's top donors...Defense contractors(bigger donations from more notable defense Corporations), toxic waste management, big oil, coal, casinos and way more banks. We all saw him talking about taking action with Iran and Syria, lowering regulations so Corporations can make more money (toxic waste), and saw him attack renewable energy while embracing big coal.

When Corporations are deemed people, they control our politicians to fulfill their agenda and monetary interest..

[Anti-Party]

Someone made a comment that made it look like I was stating "We are only going to wars because of Defense Contractors donating to politicians". This is not what I am stating at all. I am bringing up the Defense Contractors because if the topic gets raised, a party is much more likely to take on a war they don't have to. You might see Presidents who were firm against unnecessary war start wars with Countries who are in Civil wars.....wait, that just happened in Libya and Syria didn't it...

We also sell our old tanks to possible future enemies so we can buy new tanks.

Anyway, the wars over there are all to control the Petrodollar and to ensure it's primary trading currency is the USDollar.

[monty1]

Your last line says it all. But the implications of coming to terms with that truth are just too much for Americans to accept. It would require them to accept that they back the slaughter of people in the ME strictly for economic reasons. That won't happen.

But it doesn't take away from the fact that Syria is for that reason too and has nothing to do with humanitarian concerns for children.

And ohhhhhh, the children! the pictures of supposedly gassed and dying children always do it!

[Anti-Party]

Your last line says it all. But the implications of coming to terms with that truth are just too much for Americans to accept. It would require them to accept that they back the slaughter of people in the ME strictly for economic reasons. That won't happen.

But it doesn't take away from the fact that Syria is for that reason too and has nothing to do with humanitarian concerns for children.

And ohhhhhh, the children! the pictures of supposedly gassed and dying children always do it!

People are too focused on their own parties and all they want is a win for their party, not a win for America itself.

[tekkychick]

I do agree corporations and other big donors have way too much influence.

But if I have to choose (and I did in the last election) I'd choose Pres Obama's list of donors over Romney's.

Would be nice to get an amendment to overturn Citizens United, but don't think the efforts are getting anywhere fast.

[Anti-Party]

I do agree corporations and other big donors have way too much influence.

But if I have to choose (and I did in the last election) I'd choose Pres Obama's list of donors over Romney's.

Would be nice to get an amendment to overturn Citizens United, but don't think the efforts are getting anywhere fast.

Exposure is necessary to overturn Citizens United. I agree, Obama's donors were WAY better for America than Romney's.

Here is an amendment presented now; http://www.wolf-pac.com/petition

[NOVA]

I do agree corporations and other big donors have way too much influence.

But if I have to choose (and I did in the last election) I'd choose Pres Obama's list of donors over Romney's.

Would be nice to get an amendment to overturn Citizens United, but don't think the efforts are getting anywhere fast.

Exposure is necessary to overturn Citizens United. I agree, Obama's donors were WAY better for America than Romney's.

Here is an amendment presented now; http://www.wolf-pac.com/petition

Rationalize much ?

[tekkychick]

Rationalize much ?

Just dealing with reality instead of fantasy land

You want to vote for someone who can't win, go ahead.

[/MSG/]

I do agree corporations and other big donors have way too much influence.

But if I have to choose (and I did in the last election) I'd choose Pres Obama's list of donors over Romney's.

Would be nice to get an amendment to overturn Citizens United, but don't think the efforts are getting anywhere fast.

What would you replace the current system with?

[tekkychick]

What would you replace the current system with?

Roughly Britain's. Limit the amount of money and the amount of time in the campaigns. And have it all public financing.

I say roughly, because I don't know all the details in the UK, but seems like it's a lot less big money buying elections.

[Phantasmal]

What would you replace the current system with?

The drawing of lots, I think that woud be rather sporting, let Lady Luck, or G-d if you prefer decide.

[/MSG/]

The drawing of lots, I think that woud be rather sporting, let Lady Luck, or G-d if you prefer decide.

I see you've been reading your GBF.

[Anti-Party]

What would you replace the current system with?

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... ........raising money from individuals and not corporations.............You do realize that you can not force someone to vote a specific way. You can, sadly, as a business have meetings where you try to encourage your employee's to vote your way. But any corporation big enough to be a top donor absolutely has employee's helping make money to go towards a candidate they do not favor.

You assume there has to be money at all. It should be that the best talker with the best background wins. If the people want to see it, the media will cover it and they don't need money. This modern American movement of no one paying attention to politics is disgusting. People who know 75% of football players names and don't know we bombed Libya is an embarrassment to America. If the people were forced to listen to politicians so America was forced to decide who goes through we wouldn't be in this mess. Today, MANY MANY people don't know who is running for president until the last few runners up.

We need more "tree stump speeches" and fewer attack ads.

[Phantasmal]

I see you've been reading your GBF.

Educate me, GBF?

[Anti-Party]

I see you've been reading your GBF.

I answered you........Now you answer your same question. "What would you replace the current system with? "