Should Obama seek donations to his Super PAC?

[Article 15]

you can make it about whatever you want to make it about... for you. For me, they are two vastly different areas, and my complaint in this one is the hypocrisy.

Obama has done nothing illegal, but it is hypocritical, so I voice my objection.
Romney did nothing illegal, nor hypocritical, so I voiced no objection.

And I submit that's just your partisanship getting in the way. It's all good, happens to most all of us from time to time.

has nothing to do with partisanship. But if that helps you sleep at night...

"Has a law been broken?" in the face of Romney's tax status/tax policy positions is absolutely partisan.

 

[Caroljo]

It appears the President and Gov. Romney will face off in November. There is no doubt big money is behind Romney and is donating anonymously enormous funds to Super PAC's which have engaged in negative campaigning during the GOP nomination circus.

I think he should seek donations for a one way trip back to wherever he came from. Maybe Indonesia will take him back! Heck, i'd probably agree to mortgage my home to help make that happen! Lol!

 

[Conservative]

And I submit that's just your partisanship getting in the way. It's all good, happens to most all of us from time to time.

has nothing to do with partisanship. But if that helps you sleep at night...

"Has a law been broken?" in the face of Romney's tax status/tax policy positions is absolutely partisan.

you keep comparing apples to oranges.

Look, I'll make it painfully simple, so even you can comprehend...

In the Romney offshore account and 13% tax rate story... change Romney to Obama.
My reaction is the same. He didn't do anything illegal, and he was not hypocritical.


Now, in the Super PAC's are a threat to democracy story... change Obama to Romney.
My reaction is the same. He didn't do anything illegal, but he was hypocritical.

Contrary to what you appear to think, there are 'some' people here who can actually separate party from the equation. You are one of them at times.

 

[Article 15]

you keep comparing apples to oranges.

No, you want to limit it to "hypocrisy" so you can call it apples and oranges when I have clearly explained that's about whether or not something is a legit criticism and legality.

In the initial Romney thread I specifically made that the issue and I am carrying that over here.

The criticism of Romney is legit but when confronted with it you put up the "it isn't illegal" shield like that it absolves him from that criticism.

The criticism of Obama is also legit yet you aren't giving him the same treatment.

That's partisanship, man, plain and simple.

 

[Conservative]

you keep comparing apples to oranges.

No, you want to limit it to "hypocrisy" so you can call it apples and oranges when I have clearly explained that's about whether or not something is a legit criticism and legality.

In the initial Romney thread I specifically made that the issue and I am carrying that over here.

The criticism of Romney is legit but when confronted with it you put up the "it isn't illegal" shield like that it absolves him from that criticism.

The criticism of Obama is also legit yet you aren't giving him the same treatment.

That's partisanship, man, plain and simple.

so, you want to limit it to 'legality', and I want to discuss 'hypocrisy'... yet I am the only one who is partisan.

got it.

Doesn't matter to you that I said if the names, and thus parties, were reversed in each case I'd still have the same opinion... I'm still being partisan, huh.

 

[Article 15]

But anyway, time for bed.

Maybe you will allow the point to sink in, maybe not.

 

[Article 15]

so, you want to limit it to 'legality', and I want to discuss 'hypocrisy'... yet I am the only one who is partisan.

got it.

Legality vs legit criticism was the issue from Jump St.

You made it the issue in regards to Romney.

Whether the criticism was legit vs legal was the point I brought up when you did so.

You just don't want to be consistent now.

It's okay, I understand you've dug your heels in and refuse to acknowledge the reality of it.

 

[Conservative]

so, you want to limit it to 'legality', and I want to discuss 'hypocrisy'... yet I am the only one who is partisan.

got it.

Legality vs legit criticism was the issue from Jump St.

You made it the issue in regards to Romney.

Whether the criticism was legit vs legal was the point I brought up when you did so.

You just don't want to be consistent now.

It's okay, I understand you've dug your heels in and refuse to acknowledge the reality of it.

Again...

Doesn't matter to you that I said if the names, and thus parties, were reversed in each case I'd still have the same opinion... I'm still being partisan, huh.

nit-wit.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It appears the President and Gov. Romney will face off in November. There is no doubt big money is behind Romney and is donating anonymously enormous funds to Super PAC's which have engaged in negative campaigning during the GOP nomination circus.

And Obama has yet reversed another previously held position on Super Pacs. He is really reaching into those newly beloved 1%ers...

"President Obama once called 'super' political action committees — which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of cash to influence elections — a 'threat to our democracy.' Now, his re-election campaign is asking its wealthiest fund-raisers to start helping him cash in.

Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos

"Inconsistencies of opinion, arising from changes of circumstances, are often justifiable."
Daniel Webster

 

[Wry Catcher]

Or, Obama can keep laundering money through his failed Green Energy companies

You're either a liar and an asshole frank or know something (which would surprise just about everyone).

If you know something make the allegation specific as to who, what, when, where and how, under penalty perjury, to an agent with the FBI and to the readership of the USMB.

Otherwise live with my assessment of you as a liar and an asshole. Evidenced by this thread in terms of who, what, where, when and how.

Too late. Solyandra and Light Squared are already the subject of several investigations.

The fact is an investigation is not an indictment as the liar and the asshole crusaderfrank alleges.

An investigation by Darrell Issa? Yea, that's non partisan.

 

[Dr.House]

Barry breaks another campaign promise...

What a shocker....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama Fluffers will defend his every action, even when there's a dead American border guard on his hands

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You're either a liar and an asshole frank or know something (which would surprise just about everyone).

If you know something make the allegation specific as to who, what, when, where and how, under penalty perjury, to an agent with the FBI and to the readership of the USMB.

Otherwise live with my assessment of you as a liar and an asshole. Evidenced by this thread in terms of who, what, where, when and how.

Too late. Solyandra and Light Squared are already the subject of several investigations.

The fact is an investigation is not an indictment as the liar and the asshole crusaderfrank alleges.

An investigation by Darrell Issa? Yea, that's non partisan.

Stop picking on Barry!!

 

[Wry Catcher]

It appears the President and Gov. Romney will face off in November. There is no doubt big money is behind Romney and is donating anonymously enormous funds to Super PAC's which have engaged in negative campaigning during the GOP nomination circus.

he's already got the dnc to do his dirty work (like taking wall st money hand over fist) but sure, why not?

as the idiot said above, it's within the rules, and at least he won't be pretending any more that he's some hardscrabble grassroots candidate.

And yet you know who are the parts of the DNC and the RNC, as well as their agenda. Do you know who has given money to Romney's Super PAC and what their agenda may be?

And more to the point, money buys elections. Why give ones opponent the $$$ advantage?

 

[Trajan]

It appears the President and Gov. Romney will face off in November. There is no doubt big money is behind Romney and is donating anonymously enormous funds to Super PAC's which have engaged in negative campaigning during the GOP nomination circus.

try and keep up...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ood-now-kuze-its-all-about-the-benjamins.html