Quote from: Crock Hunter on February 28, 2013, 01:21:14 PM
Nothing from your linked site contradicts what you've highlighted..

You said

Quote"Another thing to consider is that Union money is locally sourced primarily from working Americans"

If you read the site you would see that it is the AFLCIO funding Dim elections across the Country, that is in no way local.
Locally sourced means that local Unions were doing the donating, and nothing would be further from the truth.
Though smaller unions do contribute to lower level elections, and they lean heavily Left as well.

Quote from: Crock Hunter on February 28, 2013, 01:16:05 PM
I'm afraid your news source isn't being completely truthful with you...

A September 2012 analysis by the Government Accountability Institute doesn't show any verifiable instances of illegal foreign donations to the Obama campaign.  In fact the report says that both candidates had issues with fraudulent Internet campaign donations in the 2008 election, and that in the 2012 election both major-party candidates' campaign literature has been circulated on foreign social media with links to pages through which donations can be made.

I'm more than willing to stop these donations.. Removing the root of all evil will undoubtedly make for a more honest open election system... .


I don't think anyone here is naive enough to think that corporations do not have great influence in our election process.. .
How Big Business Is Buying the Election

Again I ask... Would you agree to remove this level of money from our system of election.. Do you imagine the Founders would find favor in the Presidency going to the highest bidder?

From the NY Post of all places.
Obama campaign accepted foreign Web donation -- and may be hiding more
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/bam_blind_eye_to_illegal_donors_8SWotytr1RvbhyDCRyyrEL

Quote from: Crock Hunter on February 28, 2013, 01:26:02 PM
I posted the facts.. The cited report also implicates the Romney campaign..  Your failure is in depending on your heavily biased news sources to give you the complete picture..

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/08/obama-bundler-tied-to-chinese-government/

Quote from: taxed on February 28, 2013, 03:59:23 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/08/obama-bundler-tied-to-chinese-government/

It's pretty obvious where he gets his news.

Quote from: Solar on February 27, 2013, 07:37:38 PM
This forum is far Right as you put it, we also believe the Founders had it completely right.
Are you saying the Founders were "a mash-up of disorganized Libertarian notions magnified through a distorted Conservative lens.. .."

I define the "far right" as the racist droolers at St*rmfront or the pockets of neonazi trash which lurk in any society. They are not conservative, they are dangerous fanatics fully worthy of Big Government attention.

Think of politics like longitude on a globe. You eventually wind up back where you started if you go far enough in any direction. The "far right" which displays so many thuggish tactics of the far left is no damn different. They're the freaks at the end of the logic-train-line.

I saw what the ELECTED leftist freaks did to America under LBJ and 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam, thanks to Dems backing a war that was doomed to failure by their administration. Then I saw what dangerous fanatics could do under the RINO criminal Richard Nixon, who gave us more government regulation than any modern-day Republican will admit to (but hasn't got the guts to kill).

The "far right" (as the leftist invaders here would tell us) is not the group to fear if they want to tighten our tax load. Cutting federal deadwood means cutting union jobs. This is always a good thing, taking away the "right" of a government employee to hang onto a job for life.

As for sources, HotAir is owned by Michelle Malkin. I saw nothing amiss in that story's contents, but do agree this poster has a whole lot of bias to overcome before accepting the legitimacy of differing opinion.

Quote from: quiller on March 01, 2013, 04:40:54 AM
I define the "far right" as the racist droolers at St*rmfront or the pockets of neonazi trash which lurk in any society. They are not conservative, they are dangerous fanatics fully worthy of Big Government attention.

Think of politics like longitude on a globe. You eventually wind up back where you started if you go far enough in any direction. The "far right" which displays so many thuggish tactics of the far left is no damn different. They're the freaks at the end of the logic-train-line.

I saw what the ELECTED leftist freaks did to America under LBJ and 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam, thanks to Dems backing a war that was doomed to failure by their administration. Then I saw what dangerous fanatics could do under the RINO criminal Richard Nixon, who gave us more government regulation than any modern-day Republican will admit to (but hasn't got the guts to kill).

The "far right" (as the leftist invaders here would tell us) is not the group to fear if they want to tighten our tax load. Cutting federal deadwood means cutting union jobs. This is always a good thing, taking away the "right" of a government employee to hang onto a job for life.

As for sources, HotAir is owned by Michelle Malkin. I saw nothing amiss in that story's contents, but do agree this poster has a whole lot of bias to overcome before accepting the legitimacy of differing opinion.

Your definition of far right is invalid though. The "Left right" concept of politics comes from parliamentary europe. The left was the side that stood for more/total parliamentarism and the right was the side that defended monarchy. During this process the right adapted the more conservative view of Edmund Burke concerning the legitimacy of the state and private property rights concepts from Locke. The left adopted more radical collectivist ideals and that the legitimacy of the state was the will of the majority.

You are confusing far right with fascism. Fascism is another form socialism, I.e Musselini socialist party, Hitler National Socialist Worker Party and the wellfare state of Imperial Japan. In the modern sense far right is falsely attributed to socialist racist due to the communist control of semantics, but the people you are describing on stormfront are all socialist. They are ethnosocialists, I.e Albanian socialism. Whereas what we call left wing socialist are better described as troglosocialists.

I would advise you to read more about the subject as the confusion of far right=nazism is a communist concept and perspective, remember the Left is wholly dependent on demonization their opposition so that they don't have to attack the arguments but only integrity of their enemy. And by adopting the communist definition of left-right you are supporting their world view and control over language.

Edit: The only isntance in history where far right could be connected with fascist branch of socialism was the Spanish Civil War. The left consisted of different groups such as communist, anarchists, syndicalists, socialists, liberals, progressives etc and the right was made up by two different monarchy groups supporting differrent heritage lines of the monarchy, corporatist fascist (Franco), clergy and different groups of farmer/landlord coalition. Of these groups Franco was the most powerfull and this is the reason many claim that because Franco was fascist and had support from right wing groups, then fascism must be right wing. This is a very clear logical fallacy if you actually read history and philosophy. I would advice Antony Beevor: Battle for Spain.

Quote from: Solar on February 28, 2013, 01:29:25 PM
You said If you read the site you would see that it is the AFLCIO funding Dim elections across the Country, that is in no way local.
Locally sourced means that local Unions were doing the donating, and nothing would be further from the truth.
Though smaller unions do contribute to lower level elections, and they lean heavily Left as well.

Oh.. I see your confusion... . My analogy was made between money from Multinational (Global) Corporations and American (Local) Unions.. .. . American money (Local) donated to our candidates is one thing... Foreign (Global) money another.. .. .

Do you think our election process would benefit from more money ..??

Quote from: Solar on February 28, 2013, 01:31:08 PM
From the NY Post of all places.
Obama campaign accepted foreign Web donation -- and may be hiding more
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/bam_blind_eye_to_illegal_donors_8SWotytr1RvbhyDCRyyrEL

As I posted earlier from the same Government Accountability Institute report as cited in your link above... Both candidates had issues accepting online donations when they shouldn't have. .. .  Both campaigns ultimately fixed the problem..

Those are simply the facts... but the far-right overlooks one and condemns the other..

Quote from: Crock Hunter on March 01, 2013, 08:38:44 AM
Oh.. I see your confusion... . My analogy was made between money from Multinational (Global) Corporations and American (Local) Unions.. .. . American money (Local) donated to our candidates is one thing... Foreign (Global) money another.. .. .

Do you think our election process would benefit from more money ..??

And your comparison was completely flawed.
You neglected the fact that Unions are not restricted to the US, and that not all Corporations are global conglomerates.
But it's these global corps that give most of their money to the Dims, as in the GE's of the world, or GMC and it's Union connection.
Times have changed since before you learned the leftist talking point that the left cares for the little guy, they don't give a damn about you.
And learn what it means to incorporate as a business owner, only a few are actually big corporate monsters, around 90% of incorporated business is that of small business, the main source of employment in America.

Quote from: Mountainshield on March 01, 2013, 08:23:23 AM

Your definition of far right is invalid though.

Didn't read the rest.

Quote from: quiller on March 01, 2013, 09:20:55 AM
Didn't read the rest.

why not?

Edit: I checked out the definition of invalid and I'm sorry I was wrong to use it word as you do have foundation for your definition and its logical.
What I meant to say that it is incorrect.

For the record, I live in Hutaree Country --- near the hugely-respected Hillsdale College which proudly refuses federal aid and turns out some of the very best of the best in numerous branches of study. Hillsdale, Lenawee and much of Monroe Counties along the Ohio border are all deeply conservative and enjoy well over 80% actual church attendance, avid-vocal PTOs guiding local schools, and cost-cutting county and local governments now in fear for their cushy salaries from the taxpayers who have had enough.

Hutaree, for those who recall it, was a motley crew of local halfwits whose bold talk caught the ear of a federal snitch who sold the feds a bill of goods on how dangerous these guys really were. When it came time to clean house, it was the much-maligned Michigan Militia (itself rebuilding credibility after McVeigh and Nichols) who turned them in. That was responsible conservativism.

My area believes gun control is where you hit the sonofabitch you aim at. My area votes for honest people and pillories those who aren't. My area wouldn't allow and will never allow people like McVeigh to become important. My area wouldn't allow Stormfront. We'd run their asses out like we did the Black Legion in the 1930s.

Quote from: Crock Hunter on March 01, 2013, 08:45:50 AM
As I posted earlier from the same Government Accountability Institute report as cited in your link above... Both candidates had issues accepting online donations when they shouldn't have. .. .  Both campaigns ultimately fixed the problem..

Those are simply the facts... but the far-right overlooks one and condemns the other..

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/22/Report-Obama-Campaign-Accepts-16-Times-More-Donations-Via-Erroneous-Zip-Codes-Than-Romney

QuoteGAI analyzed Federal Election Commission (FEC) from the 2012 election cycle and found Obama's campaign has accepted $4,580,805.35 in campaign donations that list invalid zip codes—a figure 16 times greater than Romney's campaign. The study found that Gov. Romney's 2012 FEC data include $282,814.78 in donations that have invalid zip codes.

The Obama campaign curiously pays more in fees to turn off the "CVV" security feature that requires those donating online to enter the three or four digit number on the back of the credit card. In addition, while the campaign claims use the Address Verification System (AVS) security check, the number of donations with invalid zip codes that the campaign has accepted proves the campaign uses one of the weakest AVS systems online.

Try again.

Quote from: Solar on March 01, 2013, 08:50:01 AM
give most of their money to the Dims, as in the GE's of the world, or GMC ....

GM Donations. . . .




GE Donations . . . .





Looks like Rmoney was about $164,000 ahead.. Maybe you'd like to pick 2 others?

Quote from: Crock Hunter on March 01, 2013, 12:56:58 PM
GM Donations. . . .




GE Donations . . . .





Looks like Rmoney was about $164,000 ahead.. Maybe you'd like to pick 2 others?

OMG You got me! How could this be? GE donated less to Husein...Tell me it isn't so.
We like I said, it's a lib site so you're not going to get the full truth, but let's see if I can explain this tiny contribution, OK?

Quote2011 "Job Czar" position, as a member of President Obama's 2009 Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB). Besides Immelt's direct access to President Obama since 2009, GE was privy to Valerie Jarrett's September 2009 "Clean Energy Summit," where an array of attendees just so happened to "collectively strike gold" with over $5.3 billion in taxpayer funds from the Obama stimulus.

But you say, "So what", he appointed Immelt, big deal.
Well General Electric, paid nothing in federal taxes in 2011, even as it made billions in profit?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558