"In a 51-44 vote, the DISCLOSE Act failed to obtain the 60 votes needed to clear a Republican filibuster. The bill would have required disclosure of anyone who donates to independent groups that spent more than $10,000 on campaign ads -- or their functional equivalent -- and other election spending.
The bill was not expected to beat back the Republican filibuster, which was led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). McConnell, called the "Darth Vader of campaign finance reform" in the past, recently made news by giving a series of speeches declaring that campaign finance disclosure amounted to nothing short of harassment and a suppression of speech."
Wonder why donating to these groups needs to be hidden... by Republicans in Congress.
MikeF from FLORIDA says I can answer this
It's because liberal groups in an attempt to suppress freedom of speech put direct financial pressure via boycotts to stop anyone who won't march blindly in lock step which the wishes of the liberal elite overlords. If that doesn't work then it's liberal scum camped out in front of your house or in your state capital. Liberals support free speech as long as it's on their approved list.
I think all funding for all of these groups should stop but liberals only want to stop one side.
Ereich (18.104.22.168) from MAINE says people don't hide things that don't need to be hidden
like birth certificate and college records?
PJzaBruin (22.214.171.124) from CALIFORNIA says Nice Talking Points recital, MikeF
but Republicans have been attacking donors to Democrat causes for as long as Democrats have been attacking donors to Republican causes.
"Conservative scum" have been picketing and boycotting for decades.
RJR from MISSOURI says PJ, you will vote for Romney
but you will never admit.
MikeF from FLORIDA says not a recital
I know this will sound strange to you but unlike you the only opinion I express is my own. If it matches someone else I would have to assume it's because they're also correct.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (126.96.36.199) from CALIFORNIA says Last Presisential election cycle
The Democrats sure didn't really give a rats ass where the funds came from as long as they were winning..President Obama may yet win this election, but he certainly isn't winning the campaign funds race..Both sides have in the past and will do so again, complained about the other parties spending and where the money came from..The party complaining the most is generally the party being out spent..I wonder how all of this spending has worked out as far as which party wins the election..
Uncle Remus (188.8.131.52) from MISSISSIPPI says Campane monie
I send Barry 5 full book of S&H Green Stamps. They be sit round hear for years. Mrs. Remus say it OK cause we can rite it off our taxs.
PJzaBruin (184.108.40.206) from CALIFORNIA says Now that's a cute thought, Mac
but I don't believe if the DISCLOSE act passes, it would impact the 2012 election at all.
So why do Republican Congressmen want to hide where campaign money is coming from? Again, in the words of MikeF: simple answer: people don't hide things that don't need to be hidden
mac (Doyle McEwen) (220.127.116.11) from CALIFORNIA says They want it hidden forr the same reasons
The democrats wanted it hidden when they were leading the funds race..PJ, every Presidential election I can remember that has been some sort of campaign spending bitching and shortly there after some sort of legislation to reduce or prevent the same sort of problem again..Either these laws have a time limit on then or political groups find a way around them every time..It is not a Republican thing, nor is it a Democrat thing..It is politics, pure and simple and generally a little or a lot on the shady side..
For sure, it needs to be fixed and it isn't going to be simple to to so..
Ereich (18.104.22.168) from MAINE says This is a very big issue here in Maine
Every year or so the gay marriage issue comes up for a vote, it loses but comes closer each time. The pro same sex marriage people want to know who so they can stop donations to the pac opposed through intimidation, Occupy Wall Street style.
MikeF from FLORIDA says I agree with me
They have a very good reason not to share that info. Who wants occupy scum in their front yard.
PJzaBruin (22.214.171.124) from CALIFORNIA says Nice justification, Mac -- somebody else did it first
wait, you take issue when you think I say that...
mac (Doyle McEwen) (126.96.36.199) from CALIFORNIA says PJ, no where did I say that justifies it..
I did say that is the way it is, obviously you cannot or did not dispute that..That something exists or has been done by another group or person does not in any way justify another doing the same thing..I wasn't trying to justify anything, your comeback might be taken that you have been..If you care to look back, you will find I have never supported the campaign spending done by either party..This amount of spending has corrupted our political process, it doesn't matter who does it..
Someone on this forum commented that after the recent recall election that the state got the governor they bought..Isn't this exactly what happens every Presidential election, every Senate election, every Representive elction, every state election, every county election, most city elections and so forth..Politics used to be about beliefs and what is best for the citizenry involved, now it is just about money..
No where did I condone the spending by the Republican party, I most certainly didn't try and justify it..I stated facts, the Democrat party wasn't overly concerned with campaign spending when they were winning the campaign finance race, the Republicans are not overly concerned with it now..The Republicans were concerned when the Democrats were leading that race and now that the Republicans are winning that race the Democrats are concerned..These statements are facts, you know those things neither party is concerned with, if you read this as
justification, I cannot help you with that..
I don't have a solution to the problem, it is also obvious no one else does..The entire system is so corrupt it may not be fixable..Of course that does not mean we cannot or should not attempt to do so..
MikeF from FLORIDA says it's OK Mac; PJ is struggling to stay afloat
All of the other rats have left the sinking USS obama. He's doing the work of a dozen liberals; which is about the amount of work most of us conservatives do anyway. He's just not used to it; he's trying to get funding for a posting assistant or at least a practice poster.
Ereich (188.8.131.52) from MAINE says Even the made up lib
from Indiana is ashamed to show his face. You have to give PJ credit.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (184.108.40.206) from CALIFORNIA says I have and will continue to give
PJ credit, when he posts something worth the effort..He has done so in the past, I have few doubts he will do so again..Hell, even Major has made at least one good post, although in reality it had little to do with politics..It was still welcome information..
President Obama may be reelected, it certainly will not be because he got my vote or support..
Ereich (220.127.116.11) from MAINE says The poor guy needs
a participation trophy he shouldn't have to wait so very very long for something probably well beyond his reach.
Publius #10953 from ALABAMA says I don't want a dang thing passed...
from either side of the aisle that doesn't have bi-partisan support. It's political garbage. Sheist-can it all. That's the major benefit of having a balance in government. Look what we got with single party control of government.
Additionally, nearly every bill coming from the democrats has their agenda rider of raising taxes on those over $250K.