Are Right-Wingers Pleased With Federal Reserve’s Latest Rewards To The Job Creators?

thanks to billionaires like the kochs who are busting unions and forcing wages down

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*).......the Dems have had control for several years now. Don't even try and pass this off as a Republican problem. The entire Stimulus bill and Obamacare are nothing but giant pork barrel bills ironically targeted at Wall Street and the insurance companies which the left constantly complain about but gave billions of free taxpayer dollars too.

Why do you think the insurance companies were so supportive of Obamacare?

This tired old line about stupid Republican voters is just getting annoying and shows how dishonest and vapid you are. Republicans win the college educated vote and also more suburban voters and higher income voters, ie people that have better education and higher IQs vote Republican. Democrats clean up on low education voters and post graduate (professors etc) but there are very few of them compared to bachelor degree holders.

Once again so you tiny little liberal mind can grasp it. Obamacare which the insurance companies LOVE and the stimulus package that Wall Street LOVES are entirely Democratic bills with little or no Republican input. Your side paid off Wall Street and the insurance companies with hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money.

 

no, it's shows how clueless you are to what's really happening

[video=youtube;pEaEJjvbZ-E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEaEJjvbZ-E[/video]

 

Rhetoric and completely ignoring what I said. Everyone knows it benefits health insurance companies. No one's said anything on the contrary.

It's funny you seem to only have Obamacare as your backup to your extremely angry rant. As if that's the only thing ever that's been passed ever in the history of our country that's pro-business.

Go check out alecexposed.org and get back with me once you tally up exactly who's bought and paid for by only this one organization. Then, if you get the time, please tally up the industry donation splits both in terms of number of politicians a amount paid by industry at opensecrets.org.

I'm sure you'll find republicans top both number bribed and amount paid in both lists. I never claimed that democrats are innocent and it's funny how you get so angry and start throwing the 'obamacare' word (which isn't what it's called anyway) around like it's your kill-all-argument word. Sorry, buddy, you're barking up the wrong tree. ACA wasn't progressive enough and it ended up just being another pro business bill. It basically kept in place the actual problem with healthcare which is insurance industries. As well, I'm right there with you on the wall street issue, but again, the domino rally began with republicans which is the party of pro-business. There's really nothing you can say that refutes this. It's the pro-business party and has been the pro-business party since the 70's.

 

Obama said he was fine with it being called Obamacare........so why would anyone else object to it.

Goldman Sachs has given more money to Barack Obama than any previous candidate. In fact Barrack Obama has received more money from Wall Street firms than any other president or candidate either Republican or Democrat. You said that Republicans have the most "bribed" people and yet your entire leadership consists of people that were formerly Wall Street insiders and they gave more money to Obama and the Dems like Reid than they ever have to any Republicans.

If you admit that insurance companies benefit from Obamacare and Obamacare is nothing but a bit fat wet kiss for them then how come you do not include that in your list of pork? That is severaly hundred billions dollars of pork right there.

You can also stop now with your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) about who receives the most bribes.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/23/92794/what-do-both-parties-have-in-common.html

The top four recipients from Wall Street are all Democrats and 13 of the top twenty are Democrats and Democrats receive over 63 percent of Wall Street donations.

 

Wow........you really are dense. He was referring to stupid comments made by politicians like Akins. Did you even watch the video? Apparently a 46 second video is to long for your attention span. Also, prove my point about Republicans getting most of the college educated vote wrong.......you can't because Bush won the college educated vote twice and Romney won it. Even McCain managed to get 48% of the college educated vote and he was trounced in every category by Obama including white people.

 

he's talking about the whole gop

 

No he isn't watch it again. He is referring to the political advisers and the Atkins who make stupid comments. In fact he specifically states that they need to stop underestimating the intelligence of the voters and that they should stop making cynical arguments and 30 second sound bites. Is english your second language because there is no way you can not see that if you actually paid attention to what he said.

And once again........if Republican voters are so stupid why do they have more college degrees, more of them live in suburbs and earn more money than Dems? Even Romney got more bachelor degree holders than Obama did despite his poor showing and Bush won the college vote overwhelmingly twice.

 

This is why I can't take you seriously, you don't even understand a viewpoint accurately, yet you hate it. The fact that the GOP can and do attack their own only means that they hold something higher than their own party loyalty. Democrats don't have enough integrity to choose what's right over their own party, goes to show that their political career is always their number one priority.

 

Go Democrats!!!!!!

 

i've seen the whole speech many times

your narrow interpretation just gives more credence to jindal's accusation of the whole gop

what a joke, i've completely refuted your looney assertions with verifiable fact after verifiable fact

yet you say you can't take me seriously, when the truth is that you obviously cling to lies and misinformation

 

You say you have seen it several times and you still assert that Jindal was talking about voters being stupid? You seriously lack any comprehension whatsoever. Absolutely no one else on this forum will say that he was talking about voters when he was clearly talking about the politicians and the political advisors. You are either lying out of your ass or being willfully ignorant, either which means you have zero credibility.

He says quote "we gotta stop insulting the intelligence of the voters, we need to trust the smarts of the American people." He is clearly criticizing the party apparatus.......NOT THE VOTERS. For cheese sake, you just don't get anything do you?

Once again why do Republicans historically get more of the educated and higher income vote and the Dems get most of the low income and undereducated vote?

 

jindal's talking about gop politicians being stupid

all anyone has to do is listen to what the gop is saying to know he's right

this video is just one segment of the whole spectrum of stupid gop comments and ideas:

[video=youtube;IfjAMRgpoug]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfjAMRgpoug[/video]

 

And this has nothing to do with Citizens United ruling which happened during Obama's tenure? I'm sure they'd have love to have bought other politicians if those damn pesky laws preventing using money as free speech weren't being upheld...

1. that was in 2010, and 2 you're trying to pass off wall street donations as equating to all donations, which is sloppy. I'm talking corporate interest donations/lobbying/campaign contributions/rotating door deals, all of it with everyone. Republicans still top that list. Dems got friends on wall street, republicans got friends there AND everywhere else. My actual conspiracy theorist side of why republicans want to stop ACA is because they didn't get to that cash cow of money first. That specific dick (*)(*)(*)(*)ing out money was there for the sucking and the republicans failed to get there first and they're just mad now. But who knows why they're acting like crybabies. It certainly has nothing to do with ACA and more about demonizing the president in order to politically smear democrats and obama to drop his support as if they have some great alternative or something. If they actually had substance, they'd not be slinging monkey (*)(*)(*)(*) around and be showing how they actually are better.

 

Also. http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/

 

Citizens United had nothing to do with contribution limits. Citizen's United concerned how the money could be spent on advertising by third parties hence the creation of 50s.

The Supreme Court held in Citizens United that it was unconstitutional to ban free speech through the limitation of independent communications by corporations, associations, and unions,[21] i.e. that corporations and labor unions may spend their own money to support or oppose political candidates through independent communications like television advertisements.[22] This ruling was frequently interpreted as permitting corporations and unions to donate to political campaigns,[23] or else removing limits on how much a donor can contribute to a campaign.[24] However, these claims are incorrect, as the ruling did not affect the 1907 Tillman Act's ban on corporate campaign donations (as the Court noted explicitly in its decision[25]), nor the prohibition on foreign corporate donations to American campaigns,[26] nor did it concern campaign contribution limits.[27] The Citizens United decision did not disturb prohibitions on corporate contributions to candidates, and it did not address whether the government could regulate contributions to groups that make independent expenditures.[22] The Citizens United ruling did however remove the previous ban on corporations and organizations using their treasury funds for direct advocacy. These groups were freed to expressly endorse or call to vote for or against specific candidates, actions that were previously prohibited.[28]

You made the claim that the GOP was the party bought and paid for by the evil Wall Street types and I proved you to be a big liar. You were caught making up facts and I showed everyone that you are dishonest. The top 4 recipients for campaign donations from Wall Street are Democrats and 13 out of the 20 are Democrats. Wall Street also gives a larger percentage of their money to Democrats at a rate of over 60%. You can admit that you made a mistake and that you are simply a dullard who buys into everything that they see on therr liberal blogs or you can continue down the path and continue to be the dishonest liar that I know you to be. Frankly either one is probably an accurate view of the typical lefty statist. You and your kind are exactly the type of industrious sheep and people that promote colletive mediocrity that Mills warned about.

 

You either really have no clue what a Constitutional Conservative is, or you just wanted and excuse to troll, because you just dressed up your latest straw man with nowhere else to go.

 

No one ever thinks of "Wall Street", rampant speculation, etc as "Job creators". The Job creators lie in the Private sector. Wall Street's one big public sector. One that rips off all Americans.

 

Citizens United opened the floodgates to flooding congressional elections with money. Look at any statistical evaluation of money spent to see this ginormous jump in recent years. It was already rising due to other rulings allowing dark money. It is a piece of the puzzle and is a significant one.

The part you didn't highlight which is what I'm citing is the last sentence of your wikipedia copy/pasta: The Citizens United ruling did however remove the previous ban on corporations and organizations using their treasury funds for direct advocacy. These groups were freed to expressly endorse or call to vote for or against specific candidates, actions that were previously prohibited.[28] It seems you fail to realize that this purchasing power is a 'you scratch my back, I scratch yours' type arrangement. Frequently, congress members will have private meetings with big business CEOs and owners to discuss tactics for both legislation and for campaign finance strategies and what the message should be both on the outside through ads and on the inside through sock puppetry of congress. More often than not, you'll find republicans simply are mouthpieces for their friends, not their constituents. Even Rand Paul does this from time to time, making a really idiotic speech saying how the federal government should apologize to Apple for even thinking about auditing their incredibly low tax rate compared to the average citizen.

And yes, I did make the claim that Republicans are quite on the side of those that pay for their campaigns, buy ads supporting them, and offer them jobs as lobbyists after their tenure as a 'public servant' or come from the private sector into public office in order to work the system from the inside on behalf of their former (and likely future) employer. It may have seemed as if I denied the fact that dems are guilty too. My bad for making this seem like what I was projecting. However, historically, Republicans have been pro business since the downfall of middle class compensation for production beginning in the late 70's. It took a while for democrats to catch up overall, but they have, no doubt about it. The businesses don't care who wins, they'll pay and fund who they think will win and who agrees to bow down to them once elected. As well, this issue isn't necessarily a 'lefty statist' style argument. It's a hatred of the fact that we're openly corrupt. And here you are saying something to the effect of 'so what?' Again, financial industries account for only one stack of money being paid out. So...overall, calling dems out on just wall street is like highlighting the incredible catch by the center fielder by the baseball team that team lost the game. Great, nice play. But overall, still lost. That catch didn't do anything to change the outcome, which in this case is the fact that Republicans on the whole are bigger whores than democrats, but I concede that me saying this seems like I think selling votes is okay if you're democrat and it's definitely not. I hate this situation we have. But if you feel you want to insult me, feel free. Call me statist if you want, but GOP is statist, they just choose to use the state to pay corporate welfare rather than fund human welfare.

 

Once again you continue to lie. Citizens United DID NOT address campaign contribution limits in anyway. All it did was allow for third party spending. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission

The Citizens United decision did not disturb prohibitions on corporate contributions to candidates, and it did not address whether the government could regulate contributions to groups that make independent expenditures.

 

Yes, that's why political spending suddenly jumped each time rulings occurred on the side of dark money. Riiiiight. All parties have respectable amount of support to overturn citizens united and corporate influence of politics overall. It's definitely a non partisan issue and for you to sit here and argue with me over a wikipedia definition rather than it's practical application (much like arguing over the patriot act allowing the NSA to overstep it's bounds) is simply ludicrous. Why don't you come out and say that you love for corporations to buy votes and undermine the American majority...because your argument amounts to as much.

 

Oh so now its a bipartisan issue. You stipulated that this was overwhelmingly a Republican issue. These are your words.

If you look at the money paid into REpublicans along with the bills they've introduced around the country that are written by lobbyists, the Republicans beat the Democrats in corruption 2 to 1. Not to mention the fact most republican rhetoric is written by big business (i.e. deregulate everything, cut the department of education, the EPA, etc.)

It wasn't the Republicans that were promoting deregulation on Fannie Freddie and it took years for Barney Franks to admit that the Democrats were wrong on stopping regulation of Fannie Freddie that was being proposed by Bush and the Republicans.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2010/10/14/frank_haunted_by_stance_on_fannie_freddie/

Frank, in his most detailed explanation to date about his actions, said in an interview he missed the warning signs because he was wearing ideological blinders. He said he had worried that Republican lawmakers and the Bush administration were going after Fannie and Freddie for their own ideological reasons and would curtail the lenders’ mission of providing affordable housing.

“I was late in seeing it, no question,’’ Frank said about the lenders’ descent into insolvency.

I am not arguing a wiki point you said that Citizens United was responsible for Democrats all of a sudden getting more money from Wall Street than the Republicans did. That is a flat out lie.

 

1.The Fed controls interest rates. It is currently the only branch of the government that is behaving as it should by keeping interest rates low. Interest rates are used as a break upon the economy. QE whichever is essentially buying bonds to keep those interest rates low. While this benefits wall street and helps banks a bit it also aids anyone whose job benefits from lower intersts rates and most things do. It isn't having much impact because the Obama administration has the other break pedals pressed down. The other break pedals are regulations and rules. and taxes.

2. Dems always have gotten more corporate money and more trial lawyer money than the Republicans. It was they who created the current corporate state and largely their mismanagement that is going to wreck it. It was they who created 80% of the bureacratic empire to which the corps give fealty to and they who are the primary people who benefit from the protection money that comes into Democratic coffers to defend those same corporations from the rapacious bureaucracy the Democrats created. For every Koch brother there is a Soros, an Immelt, and a Buffet. Major corporations love regualtors. They protect them from competition.

 

the difference is that soros isn't busting unions and lowering wages

 

NO he just ruins whole countrys through currency manipulation.

http://web.archive.org/web/20101027070859/http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14700