Political Punch

This is ridiculous. My husband works for a major oil company and we have donated regularly to the Obama campaign. Our donations have absolutely nothing to do with anything his employer has said or done. They are solely because we believe that Obama would make the best leader for our country. We have also phonebanked, canvassed, and served as precinct chairs. Yet I am sure we are technically counted in your group of Obama "big oil supporters" alluded to in this article, since everyoe who donates to a campaign must put down their place of employment. There are many other individuals in my husbands workplace who have made similar personal donations of time and money. We couldn't care less what my husband's employer thinks of all this. Last time I checked it was a free country, and employees were not bound by what their employers' political views were. My bet is that, if you spoke individually with the various people who donated from places like Chevron and Shell, you will find they are doing it because Obama is their personal choice to become president. I resent your assumption that, because my husband is employed at a particular place, he must be supporting Obama only to forward the interests of big oil.

As a thoughtful liberal Democrat, I'm continually astonished and amazed at how so many of my fellow liberals and/or Democrats are taken in by Obama's slick spell. I have seen this guy for what he is (and isn't) since Day One: a slick, slogan-spouting, empty politician. At a crucial time in history, when our country and world desperately need a true leader, I'm sorry to realize that the nominee of our party will instead be a slick sloganeer.

I'm not sure what United School of socialism you all went to - but oil companies are publicly traded entities. Government interference will only make oil more expensive Americans because they have a duty to the share holders to continue to generate profits. Yes, anybody with 65 dollars can too share in the success of one of the most successful industry in the world. Greed ladies and gentlemen is what makes the United States the greatest nation in the world. Once the free market decides that oil companies should no longer charge their prices or demand oil in the first place that industry will dissolve itself.

So as far as presidential candidates accepting money, directly or indirectly, from oil companies I say great. Why not support that? All these companies are doing is operating a profitable business. Which pays taxes and deliveries a valuable product to a country that depends on it. Throw ideals out the window, at this point in time without the oil industry being supported by the government we will be about as productive as Cuba.

Obama is a person that does not put much thought into his words, he tells the audience what they want to hear. This makes him a man that lacks conscious, which makes him dangerous. As a Black man, Obama is typical of the people hustlers that come out of Chicago, preaching hate, being victims, keeping one thinking about the past, all the time taking your money. I'm ashamed that we have become what our ancestors, many good Americans and Blacks fought against,"people that base everything on the color of skin. Obama will not win in the general election and most likely will not win the primary election, why? People are seeing him for what he truly is, a racist, rookie politician. He can't even tell a good truth, he does not rise above his critics and the more he opens his mouth, the more one sees that he is not what he say he is.

Obama is a person that does not put much thought into his words, he tells the audience what they want to hear. This makes him a man that lacks conscious, which makes him dangerous. As a Black man, Obama is typical of the people hustlers that come out of Chicago, preaching hate, being victims, keeping one thinking about the past, all the time taking your money. I'm ashamed that we have become what our ancestors, many good Americans and Blacks fought against,"people that base everything on the color of skin. Obama will not win in the general election and most likely will not win the primary election, why? People are seeing him for what he truly is, a racist, rookie politician. He can't even tell a good truth, he does not rise above his critics and the more he opens his mouth, the more one sees that he is not what he say he is.

They ,both lie, it amounts to one big toss up!

Clinton isn't out there lying to people in her ads saying she takes no money from the oil industry. Obama claims he takes no money, it's a lie. He expects his supporters to not care and just play dumb. Just like Obama doesn't take money from financial institutions that are involved in the subprime housing crisis. Yeah, right. Obama supporters can come back with this, that and this about Clinton but the bottom line is you're with the candidate of change, of new politics, who supposedly doesn't take special interest, who's supposedly straight with you and who continually attacks Clinton for things he too does as he sits there an lies about it on a TV ad. How long before you guys actually start looking closely at Obama
before it's too late? He won't win the general election because you can guarantee the Republicans will be getting it out there.

Is anyone else afraid that Obama as president might bring about the anti-Christ? This really scares me. Don't be duped by his promise of peace! He's already a proven liar. How many more truths must be revealed before his supporters open their eyes?

Actually, two of Obama's top money bundlers are CEO's of oil companies.
In his ads he is trying to distinguish himself from Clinton and McCain-and it is misleading/lying because he absolutely does benefit from money from these groups, just as other candidates do.

There is nothing wrong with windfall profits for oil companies. You pay for gas, they profit. What's wrong with that?

The only thing that will fix America's asinine transportation system is high gas prices. Bring on $5 a gallon, I laugh all the way to the bank as I commute to work by bike.

Precisely so, I donated to Barack's campaign and my employer is not even aware of it. I certainly don't represent them in doing so.

Not taking money from PAC's ,alone, does not make Obama a saint. But still it's admirable, and is something the other candidates are not doing.

He deserves some bragging rights for that in my opinion.

I'm with Karen way up top in the posts- I work for a huge Health Insurance company and I donated to Obama's campaign- that doesn't mean I support the policies of the monster I work for , but I work here to pay the bills just like everyone else. If they have the capability to be able to tell where contributions are coming from why not report exactly where the people who contribute are in the food chain of the company? Although I doubt that information would get the same inflamed reaction from all of you...

If a politician accepts PAC money we can easily check who is attempting to influence him, if the same amount of money is given by individuals affiliated with a company it is much more difficult to tell who is trying to influnce the candidate.

Why refuse to accept PAC donations while at the same time accepting donations from people who are affiliated with the companies whose influence you claim to be resisiting?

Also if you are going to reveal contributions generally, reveal McCain's as well.

Since they deleted it again, I will restate that this thread is censoring Pro-Obama posts.

Do Hillary supporters really want to be affiliated with this kind of censorship?
Your still Americans right? Please speak up against this stuff, lets have a real conversation.

Unfortuntately, this is not the only instance where Barack Obama and his campaign have mislead voters with false or misleading information.

In fact, the Obama campaign has worked hard to portray his efforts as a United States Senator to be superior to that of Senator Hillary Clinton.

As a Newsweek article (Substance Abuse
Debunking a bogus claim about Clinton's legislative record) reveals, the truth is actually quite different.

Specifically, a misleading e-mail has been making the rounds, alleging that Senator Clinton has fewer legislative accomplishments than Obama, and that they are less substantive.

According to a Newsweek article dated April 1, 2008, the e-mail is false in almost every claim relative to Obama's record.

The misleading email compares only the Clinton-sponsored bills that became law with all bills sponsored or cosponsored by Obama, whether they were signed into law or not.

The debunked email also includes legislation Obama sponsored in the Illinois state Senate, not the United States Senate.

The misinformation in the email states that Obama has sponsored more legislation than Clinton, when in fact he has sponsored less.

Finally, the bogus email states that Obama has passed more bills into law than Senator Clinton, when the opposite is true.

Contrary to the e-mail's assertions, Clinton's and Obama's contributions are not qualitatively different, and quantitatively, Clinton has the edge.

Whether the subject is oil companies or accomplishments in the United States Senate, misleading and untrue information seems to be emerging as patent behavior of Obama supporters and the Obama campaign alike.

That's what I told you... OBAMA is a snake... He got two heads...
He can go either way, what is convenient to him...

He is a real snake...

"With liberals dominating the Democratic primary process, Obama has emerged largely unscathed from fire storms such as the one over his spiritual mentor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who exhorted his flock, “God damn America!” But with tens of millions of moderates poised to vote in the general election, such controversies could come back to haunt Obama.

“He’s basically creating a mosaic of things that we’ll be able to pick at,” said Republican strategist Jason Roe. “We can define him in the general election the way we defined John Kerry as being somehow out of the mainstream.”

The GOP is particularly eager to remind voters that Obama called his grandmother a “typical white person” because she feared and stereotyped blacks.

“The biggest mistake partisans and political analysts make is in assuming that the nomination voting is predictive of the general election voting,” said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. “These are two dramatically different electorates in both parties.”

For example, moderates in the general election might be put off by a voter group’s questionnaire that Obama filled out in 1996, when he was running for the state Senate in Illinois. He took dogmatically liberal positions on gun control, the death penalty and abortion. Although Obama’s handwriting is on the questionnaire, his campaign now says it was filled out by a staffer.

Republicans also plan to make hay out of Obama’s remark Saturday that if his daughters became pregnant, “I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

WOW. HOMERUN. OBAMA WOULD BE TOAST IN NOVEMBER.

Barrack Obama,Hello I Do believe that you were sent from heaven.and your beautiful family!May God Bless You&I Know and have Faith.Obama You Will Make This Place our new heaven on earth.Shay

Russell--

This:

"If Mr. Obama wanted to do something about Big Oil why did he vote for Cheny's Energy Bill that is loaded with tax breaks for the oil companies,and was written with the help of the oil companies! He now says that it was a flawed bill but it was the best we could get! Well if he thinks that is the best we can do this is another example of his poor judgement and if this what he calls working across the isle then all I can say to working americans Hold On To Your Wallet, Obamanomics is coming!"

is a prime example of your candidate "misspeaking" (a.k.a.lying) and brainwashing her supporters into parroting her hogwash.

The energy bill that Barack voted for included a net tax increase on the oil industry, billions for renewable research, development, and subsidies for conservation and efficiency . . . ALL GOOD THINGS. Your candidate was wrong to not support that bill. She claims that Barack "...voted for it with alllllllllll of those tax subsidies and give-aways that have been used by the oil companies and others to retard the development of clean renewable energy" (exact quote from her Harrisburg PA town hall), when the truth is that she LIED once again. By NOT supporting the bill, SHE worked to maintain subsidies and giveaways, and hers was a vote to retard development.

You really need to seek out the facts before you go around spreading misinformation. Then again, Clinton is not about accuracy, so why would her supporters be?

And on the question of campaign contributions from "Big Oil"--please. You all SHOULD KNOW that all donors need to state who their employer is. Are you telling me that the guy who sells me smokes at the local Hess station doesn't need a president and/or should be disqualified from donating money? Seriously. Folks need to think before going off half-cocked about things that make sense when one applies simple logic.

Remember the millenia
Who could stop the bush mania?

That folksy guy, we identify.
Poor Gore, an educated bore.
Who cares if Bush swerved
While Gore served.

And now its Obama who
captures the drama.
Inspite of the wrong ilk of Wright,
It might be a bond of bilk and bite.

When disarmed by charm,
Or admiring the armed.
Mc Cain may bring more pain,
Hidden in Bush was fight
Bilk and bite.
If bite is in Obama,
We might repeat the trauma.