GOP & US Chamber of Commerce Threaten The USA

[Procrustes Stretched]

GOP & US Chamber of Commerce Threaten The USA

Who is buying our nation? Who is threatening the US system? The Chamber support shipping US jobs overseas?


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/opinion/06wed1.html

The United States Chamber of Commerce — one of the biggest advertisers in midterm races around the country — is actively soliciting foreign money, and government enforcers seem to be doing nothing to stop it.

-------

ADVISORY: Sen. Franken & ThinkProgress on Secret Money and Politics

ADVISORY: Sen. Franken & ThinkProgress on Secret Money and Politics

-----------

Ruppert Murdoch is outraged. Because it was supposed to be a secret.

He said he never intended for his gift to the Chamber of Commerce to become public

Rupert Murdoch Explains His Political Donations: A Favor For a Friend | The New York Observer

 

[Oddball]

Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would quit trying to tax and regulate businesses out of business, they'd have more incentive to stay in America.

Just sayin'.

 

[loosecannon]

Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would quit trying to tax and regulate businesses out of business, they'd have more incentive to stay in America.

Just sayin'.

Didn't you mean to say: "Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would work for Chinese wages, they'd have more incentive to stay in America"?

 

[Annie]

While a day late, Dante doesn't disappoint in liberal talking points:

Power Line - From zero to well-publicized nothing in record time

From zero to well-publicized nothing in record time
October 6, 2010 Posted by Paul at 10:35 PM

Journolist, or its functional equivalent, must be alive, well, and working overtime somewhere in cyberspace. At least that's my explanation for how accusations of impropriety and illegality against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spread in about a day's time, from the lefty Think Progress blog, to Huffington Post left-winger Sam Stein, to MSNBC, and then to editorial pages of the New York Times and, via funnyman Al Franken, to the U.S. Senate.

The allegation is that, in the words of Think Progress, "the Chamber is likely skirting longstanding campaign finance law that bans the involvement of foreign corporations in American elections." Supposedly, the Chamber is doing so by using money from foreign corporations associated with Chamber affiliates overseas in U.S. elections.

I'd like to make three points about this claim. First, there doesn't appear to be any evidence to support it. The Chamber says it has a process in place to ensure that foreign funds are not spent in U.S. elections. If so, as I understand it, there is no unlawful conduct. Moreover, neither Think Progress nor any those who picked up their claim, appears to have any evidence that contradicts what the Chamber says. Simply put, the left's attack on the Chamber appears to be made up out of whole cloth.

Second, as the Center for Competitive Politics points out, there is a serious tension between the claim of Think Progress and other leftists that the Chamber's alleged conduct violates the law and the standard leftist talking point that the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates to foreign spending in U.S. elections. In reality, as Think Progress' allegations of illegality against the Chamber acknowledge, foreign spending in U.S. elections remains illegal. Again, however, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the Chamber is facilitating such foreign spending.

Third, Think Progress' fallback position is that even if the Chamber isn't putting foreign money into American campaigns, money is fungible, so that foreign money frees up other money for campaigns. But to the extent this argument has any validity, it also applies to a number of unions. The AFL-CIO has a robust foreign program. Moreover, as the Center for Competitive Politics notes, the Service Employees International Union represents employees in Canada. So does the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. And the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has members not just in Canada but also in Panama and several Caribbean nations. Don't their dues free up money that these powerhouse unions can use in U.S. political campaigns?

The Chamber's conduct is no more scandalous than that of these unions, which is to say, on the evidence presented so far, it is not scandalous at all.

Lots of links at site.

 

[Oddball]

Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would quit trying to tax and regulate businesses out of business, they'd have more incentive to stay in America.

Just sayin'.

Didn't you mean to say: "Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would work for Chinese wages, they'd have more incentive to stay in America"?

More total bullshit economic ignorance.

There are numerous reasons for offshoring operations, that have little to do with wages....Excessive employee turnover, like in the field of software troubleshooting phone banks, for one example.

You populists really need a new set of yammering points.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would quit trying to tax and regulate businesses out of business, they'd have more incentive to stay in America.

Just sayin'.

yeah right.

JFK, the demand-side tax cutter. - By David Greenberg - Slate Magazine

I'm for taxing businesses out of business. And Obama is a socialist who confiscated GM.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would quit trying to tax and regulate businesses out of business, they'd have more incentive to stay in America.

Just sayin'.

Didn't you mean to say: "Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would work for Chinese wages, they'd have more incentive to stay in America"?

 

[Oddball]

Yeah...Whatever.

When have you stood for cutting America corporate tax rates, which are amongst the highest in the industrialized world?

 

[Revere]

Where is the evidence any of the overseas fundraising is used for US political action on the part of the C of C?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

While a day late, Dante doesn't disappoint in liberal talking points:

Power Line - From zero to well-publicized nothing in record time

From zero to well-publicized nothing in record time
October 6, 2010 Posted by Paul at 10:35 PM

Journolist, or its functional equivalent, must be alive, well, and working overtime somewhere in cyberspace. At least that's my explanation for how accusations of impropriety and illegality against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spread in about a day's time, from the lefty Think Progress blog, to Huffington Post left-winger Sam Stein, to MSNBC, and then to editorial pages of the New York Times and, via funnyman Al Franken, to the U.S. Senate.

The allegation is that, in the words of Think Progress, "the Chamber is likely skirting longstanding campaign finance law that bans the involvement of foreign corporations in American elections." Supposedly, the Chamber is doing so by using money from foreign corporations associated with Chamber affiliates overseas in U.S. elections.

I'd like to make three points about this claim. First, there doesn't appear to be any evidence to support it. The Chamber says it has a process in place to ensure that foreign funds are not spent in U.S. elections. If so, as I understand it, there is no unlawful conduct. Moreover, neither Think Progress nor any those who picked up their claim, appears to have any evidence that contradicts what the Chamber says. Simply put, the left's attack on the Chamber appears to be made up out of whole cloth.

Second, as the Center for Competitive Politics points out, there is a serious tension between the claim of Think Progress and other leftists that the Chamber's alleged conduct violates the law and the standard leftist talking point that the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates to foreign spending in U.S. elections. In reality, as Think Progress' allegations of illegality against the Chamber acknowledge, foreign spending in U.S. elections remains illegal. Again, however, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the Chamber is facilitating such foreign spending.

Third, Think Progress' fallback position is that even if the Chamber isn't putting foreign money into American campaigns, money is fungible, so that foreign money frees up other money for campaigns. But to the extent this argument has any validity, it also applies to a number of unions. The AFL-CIO has a robust foreign program. Moreover, as the Center for Competitive Politics notes, the Service Employees International Union represents employees in Canada. So does the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. And the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has members not just in Canada but also in Panama and several Caribbean nations. Don't their dues free up money that these powerhouse unions can use in U.S. political campaigns?

The Chamber's conduct is no more scandalous than that of these unions, which is to say, on the evidence presented so far, it is not scandalous at all.

Lots of links at site.

talking points? I was on this yesterday, but I did not post it. too busy. sorry

money is fungible. that is an issue. Did Murdoch and others give for the political campaigns? Trying to mask what the Chamber does by dragging the Unions into this is too pathetic. It's not a defense, it's a red herring.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Where is the evidence any of the overseas fundraising is used for US political action on the part of the C of C?

Seeing how conservatives are asking for all kinds of Congressional investigations should they win the Congress, maybe we need one here?

 

[Revere]

No, money is not fungible. Not by the IRS' standards or anyone else's.

 

[Annie]

While a day late, Dante doesn't disappoint in liberal talking points:

Power Line - From zero to well-publicized nothing in record time

From zero to well-publicized nothing in record time
October 6, 2010 Posted by Paul at 10:35 PM

Journolist, or its functional equivalent, must be alive, well, and working overtime somewhere in cyberspace. At least that's my explanation for how accusations of impropriety and illegality against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spread in about a day's time, from the lefty Think Progress blog, to Huffington Post left-winger Sam Stein, to MSNBC, and then to editorial pages of the New York Times and, via funnyman Al Franken, to the U.S. Senate.

The allegation is that, in the words of Think Progress, "the Chamber is likely skirting longstanding campaign finance law that bans the involvement of foreign corporations in American elections." Supposedly, the Chamber is doing so by using money from foreign corporations associated with Chamber affiliates overseas in U.S. elections.

I'd like to make three points about this claim. First, there doesn't appear to be any evidence to support it. The Chamber says it has a process in place to ensure that foreign funds are not spent in U.S. elections. If so, as I understand it, there is no unlawful conduct. Moreover, neither Think Progress nor any those who picked up their claim, appears to have any evidence that contradicts what the Chamber says. Simply put, the left's attack on the Chamber appears to be made up out of whole cloth.

Second, as the Center for Competitive Politics points out, there is a serious tension between the claim of Think Progress and other leftists that the Chamber's alleged conduct violates the law and the standard leftist talking point that the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United opened the floodgates to foreign spending in U.S. elections. In reality, as Think Progress' allegations of illegality against the Chamber acknowledge, foreign spending in U.S. elections remains illegal. Again, however, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the Chamber is facilitating such foreign spending.

Third, Think Progress' fallback position is that even if the Chamber isn't putting foreign money into American campaigns, money is fungible, so that foreign money frees up other money for campaigns. But to the extent this argument has any validity, it also applies to a number of unions. The AFL-CIO has a robust foreign program. Moreover, as the Center for Competitive Politics notes, the Service Employees International Union represents employees in Canada. So does the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. And the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has members not just in Canada but also in Panama and several Caribbean nations. Don't their dues free up money that these powerhouse unions can use in U.S. political campaigns?

The Chamber's conduct is no more scandalous than that of these unions, which is to say, on the evidence presented so far, it is not scandalous at all.

Lots of links at site.

talking points? I was on this yesterday, but I did not post it. too busy. sorry

money is fungible. that is an issue. Did Murdoch and others give for the political campaigns? Trying to mask what the Chamber does by dragging the Unions into this is too pathetic. It's not a defense, it's a red herring.

LOL! Comparing the topic at the root is not a red herring. Now that would be questioning Obama's performance and hearing about Palin or her family.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yeah...Whatever.

When have you stood for cutting America corporate tax rates, which are amongst the highest in the industrialized world?

American corporations are hurting too. Always were. Those damn taxes.

 

[Revere]

Conservatives want to investigate the current regime, not private corporations.

 

[Oddball]

talking points? I was on this yesterday, but I did not post it. too busy. sorry

money is fungible. that is an issue. Did Murdoch and others give for the political campaigns? Trying to mask what the Chamber does by dragging the Unions into this is too pathetic. It's not a defense, it's a red herring.

OK...Let's talk about, John Huang, Charlie Trie, Buddhist monks and Loral Aerospace.

Or how 'bout George Soros?

 

[loosecannon]

Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would quit trying to tax and regulate businesses out of business, they'd have more incentive to stay in America.

Just sayin'.

Didn't you mean to say: "Maybe if leftist wackaloons like you would work for Chinese wages, they'd have more incentive to stay in America"?

More total bullshit economic ignorance.

There are numerous reasons for offshoring operations, that have little to do with wages....Excessive employee turnover, like in the field of software troubleshooting phone banks, for one example.

You populists really need a new set of yammering points.

But you really mean wages! Chinese wages. All that other stuff is secondary and tertiary and you fucking know it, poser!

 

[Oddball]

You're a walking populist talking point fool.

A lot of the phone bank work went to India, where the turnover is vastly lower.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

talking points? I was on this yesterday, but I did not post it. too busy. sorry

money is fungible. that is an issue. Did Murdoch and others give for the political campaigns? Trying to mask what the Chamber does by dragging the Unions into this is too pathetic. It's not a defense, it's a red herring.

OK...Let's talk about, John Huang, Charlie Trie, Buddhist monks and Loral Aerospace.

Or how 'bout George Soros?

two wrongs always make a righty right, eh?

this line of defense is even too pathetic for you. but Soros? The evil Billionaire?

 

[Oddball]

Never said that.

Best check that plank in your eye, before you go around blabbering about the speck in your neighbor's.

IOW, clean up your own backyard first.