major campaign donors should be publicly identified

My bank account has no public implications. My posting to this messageboard, also, has no public implications. The public would be unjustified in wanting to know about that which doesn't effect them. However, they have every right to know about that which does effect them, transactions with public implications, such as campaign donations, and a failure to provide them with such things is a violation of their rights and freedoms. Your willfully ignorant attempts to falsely equivocate between these two very seperate realms is incredibly disingenous.
 
Why do you think that the American people have no right to know who their politicians serve? That's true fascism.

Because my money is my business should all government agencies publish lists of those them employ? After all, they serve the state. I, as a tax payer, want to know who I'm paying. Same with government contractors. And those who contract for contractors.
 
Because my money is my business should all government agencies publish lists of those them employ? After all, they serve the state. I, as a tax payer, want to know who I'm paying. Same with government contractors. And those who contract for contractors.

I believe that information should be available and I believe is through the Freedom of Information act.
 
My bank account has no public implications. My posting to this messageboard, also, has no public implications. The public would be unjustified in wanting to know about that which doesn't effect them. However, they have every right to know about that which does effect them, transactions with public implications, such as campaign donations, and a failure to provide them with such things is a violation of their rights and freedoms. Your willfully ignorant attempts to falsely equivocate between these two very seperate realms is incredibly disingenous.

Your bank account has no public implications? Really? So you don't receive, say, money for school? That money, and/or that school, are tax payer connected. We have a right to know how you spent it. That money could go towards universal healthcare if you didn't blow it all on Jim Beam.
 
koch-democracy_money.jpg
 
it was not clear to me and that is still no excuse for profanity

i have complained to damo about your abuse of power

if you have insufficient self restraint, then you do not deserve to be a moderator

as for being cute or passive aggressive, i do not think so nor was it my intent

It's THE RETURN OF POET!!
 
look I have nothing personal against don and I've never had a problem with him before. But I don't feel inclined to treat him differently than anyone else. If he says/does something I disagree with I am going to point it out in my usual fashion. That said, it's over and done with so lets not say things we can't take back, like comparing him to poet for example. that's just mean.
 
look I have nothing personal against don and I've never had a problem with him before. But I don't feel inclined to treat him differently than anyone else. If he says/does something I disagree with I am going to point it out in my usual fashion. That said, it's over and done with so lets not say things we can't take back, like comparing him to poet for example. that's just mean.

HA HA HA HA HA HA
 
Freedom of Information Act is to gain access to government information. You can't use it to spy on your neighbours!

As for Watermark's bank account, I'm pretty sure there will be a transaction recorded everytime he has to buy more controlled substances, so that might be a matter of public concern... :D
 
All donors should be publicly identified. Let's say I gave $19 to a candidate "friend"... that doesn't get reported, so we talk about it and I give $19 a million times through a nice little link on his web page.... Still not reported. They don't have to gather any information for such a low dollar number, yet I still bought influence and the candidate gets to pretend that "most" of his donations were small dollars from bunches of people.
 
Back
Top