Bank Bailouts? Show me the money! McCain vs Obama vs Paul

[rightofpeople]

http://digg.com/politics/Bank_Bailouts_Show_me_the_money_McCain_vs_Obama_vs _Paul

It's oft said that to figure out what is really going on you simply follow the money. Who wants to bail out failing banks with your money? The answer is simple, who was given millions of dollars by failing banks? Thanks to www.opensecrets.org you may quickly see who has contributed to your representatives. The figures for Paul are for one year.

[Scotso]

All these digg posts, I guess I need to actually sign up. I curse these websites that don't let you share your opinion without supplying them with (false) personal information.

[Scotso]

Some top dawg at Google is a Ron Paul fanboy.

[Knightskye]

Lawl at DoD giving $20,000 to Dr. Paul.

Not sure I understand the Google, Microsoft, or USPS ones, though.

He wants competition for first class mail. Wouldn't the USPS be against that?

Dugg and commented. I really like my comment. :D

[rightofpeople]

They are employee contributions, so, McCain and Obama are getting contributions from wealthy bankers, and Ron Paul is getting contributions from the troops, techs, and working class.

5 Diggs

[Scotso]

They are employee contributions, so, McCain and Obama are getting contributions from wealthy bankers, and Ron Paul is getting contributions from the troops, techs, and working class.

5 Diggs

Yes, but even so, the USPS one is a little humorous. But you know Dr. Paul must be on to something when people involved in an institution he would basically get rid of are donating money to him. ;)

[rightofpeople]

I don't think Ron Paul would get rid of the USPS. It's a for profit corporation now and is operating at a profit, it's no longer government.

What he might do, though, is allow competition in all classes of mail.

[bojo68]

Not trying to put down your idea, and I've used this type approach myself, but I'm convinced that German, English, Australian and Chinese banks have bad paper they want out of, and this bailout specifically allows for the bailing of non us entity's, they don't even have to be banks. I believe that's the reason for the sudden push, they told Paulson they were going to quit buying tbills without it. Hence why he said the economy was rosy a few months back, now he's scared for his millions.

[DAFTEK]

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/383/contributionhighlightsbm0.jpg

[rightofpeople]

I don't know, but what is for sure, is that it makes a powerful statement, when both presidential candidates are being funded by two of the largest banks asking for a bailout.

Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley!

...and the Treasurer, Henry Paulson, was the highest paid CEO on Wall Street as head of Goldman Sachs, receiving half a billion in stock.

[rightofpeople]

36

[rightofpeople]

55 - votes for the crystal clear, plain and simple truth!

[bluemarkets]

follow the money trail ...

[Pete]

Nice one. I dugg all the comments, too.

Re: RP and the USPS, it is mandated in the Constitution, so OK in his book of departments to keep.

[rightofpeople]

Nice one. I dugg all the comments, too.

Re: RP and the USPS, it is mandated in the Constitution, so OK in his book of departments to keep.

Couldn't make a better point than that!

But don't you think that Paul would at least allow competition in mail rather than letting the USPS have a monopoly on it? Or because it is authorized in the Constitution, by law, it is allowed a monopoly?

[rightofpeople]

Kind of how congress is SUPPOSED to have a monopoly on coining money!

[rightofpeople]

78 - votes for the simple truth!

[HOLLYWOOD]

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/383/contributionhighlightsbm0.jpg

BUMP!

[freelance]

Aren't these contributions coming from employees? Don't they pull those figures from the "Employee" column, not the contributor column?

[jrskblx125]

bump because this seems incredibly important to me...

[rightofpeople]

Aren't these contributions coming from employees? Don't they pull those figures from the "Employee" column, not the contributor column?

Yes, individuals are limited to contributions of $2,300 each, but if your company has many employees, that limit is very easy to circumvent.

A contribution list sorted by company shows exactly where the interests lie!

Pardon the pun.

[rational thinker]

dugg and shouted

[heavenlyboy34]

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/383/contributionhighlightsbm0.jpg

BUMP!

source please, OP? This is really interesting! :D:eek:

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

Opensecrets.org, probably.

[afmatt]

The top three under Dr Paul's name are very heartwarming - especially considering everyone in the military that gave money broke at least one DOD regulation to do so.

[rightofpeople]

The top three under Dr Paul's name are very heartwarming - especially considering everyone in the military that gave money broke at least one DOD regulation to do so.

They broke DOD regulation? What do you mean?

[rational thinker]

bump

[rightofpeople]

125 votes for the simple truth, which can set us free!

People just need to learn of it.

[RCA]

I thought corporations couldn't donate money to presidential campaigns?

[rightofpeople]

Employees can, so if you have a lot of employees, you can make a lot of donations.

Yes, individuals are limited to contributions of $2,300 each, but if your company has many employees, that limit is very easy to circumvent.

A contribution list sorted by company shows exactly where the interests lie!

Pardon the pun.

[RCA]

Ok, that makes sense. I think the chart should reflect that it's from employees themselves and not actual corporations. Also, one thing I think is misleading about this chart is contributions from McBama are going back to 2003, but Paul only back to 2007, which if one didn't pay attention to the chart, it would appear that McBama has received that much since 2007 only.

[rightofpeople]

Yes, it would be better if it only showed 2007-2008, which is when almost all the money was given for the presidential campaigns. However, if you don't even look at Ron Paul's contributions, the contributions of Obama and McCain tell the whole story of who they are really looking out for.

Here are their 2007-2008 figures:

Barack Obama Contributions for 2007-2008:

Goldman Sachs $691,930
University of California $611,207
Citigroup Inc $448,599
JPMorgan Chase & Co $442,919
Harvard University $435,769
Google Inc $420,174
UBS AG $404,750
National Amusements Inc $389,140
Microsoft Corp $377,235
Lehman Brothers $370,524
Sidley Austin LLP $350,302
Moveon.org $347,463
Skadden, Arps et al $340,264
Time Warner $338,527
Wilmerhale Llp $335,398
Morgan Stanley $318,070
Latham & Watkins $297,400
Jones Day $289,476
University of Chicago $278,885
Stanford University $276,038

John McCain Contributions for 2007-2008:

Merrill Lynch $298,413
Citigroup Inc $269,251
Morgan Stanley $233,272
Goldman Sachs $208,395
JPMorgan Chase & Co $179,975
AT&T Inc $174,487
Blank Rome LLP $150,426
Credit Suisse Group $150,025
Greenberg Traurig LLP $146,787
UBS AG $140,165
PricewaterhouseCoopers $140,120
US Government $137,617
Bank of America $129,475
Wachovia Corp $122,846
Lehman Brothers $117,500
FedEx Corp $113,453
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
US Army $103,613
Bear Stearns $99,300
Pinnacle West Capital $97,700

[rational thinker]

bump

[rightofpeople]

We're up to 150 now, this needs to go front page so everyone can see it.

Take a moment to digg and pass it on to others.

[KramerDSP]

Only 150 Diggs ? Something is seriously wrong.

BTW, not one but two Obama supporters who I've been talking with about the Bailouts were crestfallen to see the campaign contributions link (http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/383/contributionhighlightsbm0.jpg), and to hear that Biden and Obama voted for this bill. One of them said "Sigh. It's over. Obama sold out".

I really think there's an undercurrent of anger gaining momentum amongst the initial Obama supporters who liked him because of his stance on Iraq and because of how "real" and "genuine" he seems.

[KramerDSP]

Yes, it would be better if it only showed 2007-2008, which is when almost all the money was given for the presidential campaigns. However, if you don't even look at Ron Paul's contributions, the contributions of Obama and McCain tell the whole story of who they are really looking out for.

Here are their 2007-2008 figures:

Barack Obama Contributions for 2007-2008:

Goldman Sachs $691,930
University of California $611,207
Citigroup Inc $448,599
JPMorgan Chase & Co $442,919
Harvard University $435,769
Google Inc $420,174
UBS AG $404,750
National Amusements Inc $389,140
Microsoft Corp $377,235
Lehman Brothers $370,524
Sidley Austin LLP $350,302
Moveon.org $347,463
Skadden, Arps et al $340,264
Time Warner $338,527
Wilmerhale Llp $335,398
Morgan Stanley $318,070
Latham & Watkins $297,400
Jones Day $289,476
University of Chicago $278,885
Stanford University $276,038

John McCain Contributions for 2007-2008:

Merrill Lynch $298,413
Citigroup Inc $269,251
Morgan Stanley $233,272
Goldman Sachs $208,395
JPMorgan Chase & Co $179,975
AT&T Inc $174,487
Blank Rome LLP $150,426
Credit Suisse Group $150,025
Greenberg Traurig LLP $146,787
UBS AG $140,165
PricewaterhouseCoopers $140,120
US Government $137,617
Bank of America $129,475
Wachovia Corp $122,846
Lehman Brothers $117,500
FedEx Corp $113,453
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
US Army $103,613
Bear Stearns $99,300
Pinnacle West Capital $97,700

Are you sure this is for 2007-2008 or 2003-2008 ??

[rational thinker]

bump

[rightofpeople]

Are you sure this is for 2007-2008 or 2003-2008 ??

Yep, those contributions are for only 2007-2008!

Check it out!

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contriball.php?cycle=2008

[rightofpeople]

Only 150 Diggs ? Something is seriously wrong.

BTW, not one but two Obama supporters who I've been talking with about the Bailouts were crestfallen to see the campaign contributions link (http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/383/contributionhighlightsbm0.jpg), and to hear that Biden and Obama voted for this bill. One of them said "Sigh. It's over. Obama sold out".

I really think there's an undercurrent of anger gaining momentum amongst the initial Obama supporters who liked him because of his stance on Iraq and because of how "real" and "genuine" he seems.

Yes, I think Obama and McCain supporters are voting the Digg down trying to bury the truth as fast as it climbs, I've seen the votes go up and down in seconds.

It's a real shame of people to try to hide the facts, regardless of who they support, we should all value the truth.

[rightofpeople]

175, it's starting to get up there, just a little more and it should hit the front page, where it can really take off.

Even if it doesn't, I'll make a better comparison and include both house and senate leaders in an even more powerful digg!

[rightofpeople]

It's the 3rd most Dugg for today, so it just needs a bit more to break through.

[JaylieWoW]

Yes, I think Obama and McCain supporters are voting the Digg down trying to bury the truth as fast as it climbs, I've seen the votes go up and down in seconds.

It's a real shame of people to try to hide the facts, regardless of who they support, we should all value the truth.

I think the real problem is they can't handle the truth. It isn't about what is true, its about who wins. Our voters are mostly interested in 1. picking the winner 2. squelching/controlling/defeating competitive viewpoints (not because they disagree but because they want to (see #1).

We're looking for the next "Crimson Tide" (insert your own geographical football favorite reference here). The WINNER above all else. I guess that's why a single word "change" has won over so many empty headed people. They don't want the truth, they just want to pick the winner so they can say... SEE I WAS RIGHT. In some way I'll never understand, their guy "winning" makes them a winner by association. Go figure. :rolleyes:

[rightofpeople]

I think the real problem is they can't handle the truth. It isn't about what is true, its about who wins. Our voters are mostly interested in 1. picking the winner 2. squelching/controlling/defeating competitive viewpoints (not because they disagree but because they want to (see #1).

We're looking for the next "Crimson Tide" (insert your own geographical football favorite reference here). The WINNER above all else. I guess that's why a single word "change" has won over so many empty headed people. They don't want the truth, they just want to pick the winner so they can say... SEE I WAS RIGHT. In some way I'll never understand, their guy "winning" makes them a winner by association. Go figure. :rolleyes:

I think you're right, everyone that does not know anything is just out to win, even though they have no idea what their candidate really stands for, i.e. big handouts from banks to vote in favor of big banks.

"Win" the election and lose America.

Not if I can help. :p

[rightofpeople]

Right at the top of upcoming most dugg:

http://digg.com/all/politics/upcoming/most

[rightofpeople]

221 - now it's starting to pick up.

Digg for the truth about McCain, Obama, and Paul!

[rightofpeople]

2 hours left.

I'm thinking of improving it with all congressional leaders.

Any other good places to post Diggs?

Maybe RussiaToday and Al Jazeera?

They seem to like the truth about America, even if Americans don't.

:)

Any other good forums?

[rightofpeople]

280 - Diggs for McCain and Obama's failed bank funding!

[Andrew Ryan]

digged favorited and shouted

[rightofpeople]

Still plugging away. This is such basic fact, that everyone should be made aware of it before placing a vote.

How can it be that both 'leading' presidential candidates' top contributers are the same?

Unless the candidates are the same?

[Andrew Ryan]

bump