Laura Ingraham on This Week

[dante1]

"a bunch of us sitting next to each other at an Obama Washington dinner, prominent conservatives and cabinet members, we are looking at each other saying I don't know if Romney can beat him, because the Obama operation is really smart and will run a good campaign" this is coming from a real conservative. Oh my, some people on the right are even casting doubts. I have never heard this from the other side in a Presidential campaign.

Gingrich is probably done again, maybe a third comeback but it is doubtful. Romney beat him by tossing around negative stuff with a ton of unanswered money. Whether your like Newt or not is this the way you want a candidate to win. Money, money, money it doesn't seem fair. Election laws should be changed. If the most money wins. WoW!

[muldoon]

Whether your like Newt or not is this the way you want a candidate to win. Money, money, money it doesn't seem fair. Election laws should be changed. If the most money wins. WoW!

Negative ads, and going negative in general, simply work and very rarely backfire.

Pretty amazing primary season. Did anyone ever expect to see the day where conservatives run ads, and use talking points, that look like they came from Occupy Wall Street?

There's an ad paid for by Newts people attacking Romney that begins:

Wall Street’s corporate raiders made billions of dollars . . . their greed was only matched by their willingness to do anything to make millions in profits. Nothing spared, nothing mattered but greed. This film is about one such raider and his firm

[john230]

Do you think Capitalism is the enemy of Democracy? Sure a lot of it comes down to money, but that's nothing new. People with the most money live in the biggest houses, buy the nicest cars, and donate the most to the candidate of their choice. The greatness of America is that there is enough money on both sides to make it interesting. And I would rather it come down to money than force.

[dante1]

Do you think Capitalism is the enemy of Democracy? Sure a lot of it comes down to money, but that's nothing new. People with the most money live in the biggest houses, buy the nicest cars, and donate the most to the candidate of their choice. The greatness of America is that there is enough money on both sides to make it interesting. And I would rather it come down to money than force.

Maybe so and possibly true but the amount of money now infused into elections is getting ridiculous and it is arbitrary simply depending on what millionaire or billionaire and who they want to support. An election can literally be won because of one or two very wealthy people. That doesn't seem right.

[john230]

Maybe so and possibly true but the amount of money now infused into elections is getting ridiculous and it is arbitrary simply depending on what millionaire or billionaire and who they want to support. An election can literally be won because of one or two very wealthy people. That doesn't seem right.

Good points, but what is the alternative? Do you want to take all money out of politics and make it a level playing field? That sounds like socialism.

[dante1]

Good points, but what is the alternative? Do you want to take all money out of politics and make it a level playing field? That sounds like socialism.

You do know I hope that socialism is not communism. I don't know why socialism has received such a negative connotation. I don't mean to question your knowledge but some people think these two economic system are one in the same. Some Socialism in a democracy is a very viable and successful economic system enjoying popular support in many countries. Some of these countries have a people that enjoy a high standard of living and they claim year after year to be the happiest people in the world. But, that is another argument.

Yes, I think a level playing field in politics would be a good thing. Don't you? What would be wrong with a fair amount of money allowed each candidate? Would that really stifle free speech. I don't think so. But, it would as you say level the field.

I am certainly not in favor of the government running and regulating every facet of every business but I do think that a partnership between government and business using fair regulations and practices can make an ever stronger and better market system. Government and capitalism should be a cooperative and work hand in hand not competing with each other with one claiming the other is evil. Neither is evil.

[muldoon]

Good points, but what is the alternative? Do you want to take all money out of politics and make it a level playing field? That sounds like socialism.

Why does it have to be "all the money"?

What is so socialist about having every dollar in a campaign associated with an actual real person (and not things like pseudo-anonymous "Super PACs" etc?).

People seem perfectly ok with individuals having caps on how much they can donate in a single campaign (and have it in the public record of who they are), but a Super-PAC can spend unlimited money, be near impossible to track down in real time who is funding it, and have essentially one person dump millions into it? You're ok with that?

[john230]

Why does it have to be "all the money"?

What is so socialist about having every dollar in a campaign associated with an actual real person (and not things like pseudo-anonymous "Super PACs" etc?).

People seem perfectly ok with individuals having caps on how much they can donate in a single campaign (and have it in the public record of who they are), but a Super-PAC can spend unlimited money, be near impossible to track down in real time who is funding it, and have essentially one person dump millions into it? You're ok with that?

Both sides have money and spread propaganda. The great thing about the US democracy is that elections are won in the middle. Do you think it's fair for someone to live in a million dollar mansion, and someone else in a double wide trailer. Life isn't fair. And these people that donate millions can spend all they want, but it's still up to the individual to cast that vote. They do not have to buy what they are selling.

[dante1]

Both sides have money and spread propaganda. The great thing about the US democracy is that elections are won in the middle. Do you think it's fair for someone to live in a million dollar Mansion, and someone else in a double wide trailer. Life isn't fair. And these people that donate millions can spend all they want, but it's still up to the individual to cast that vote. They do not have to buy what they are selling.

Yes they don't, but they do. Case in point the resurgence and then the descent of Newt, think about it. It is almost unbelievable how he has shot up and then down and all because of money. Your point about life being unfair is valid, no doubt. However, maybe a democracy should care about making life as fair as possible. Very little can be done about the guy who lives in a mansion and the guy living in a trailer. But, with legislation a civilized country could at least attempt to make life as fair as possible and regulating money in an election could be one way of accomplishing this.

[King Mayan]

Do you think Capitalism is the enemy of Democracy? Sure a lot of it comes down to money, but that's nothing new. People with the most money live in the biggest houses, buy the nicest cars, and donate the most to the candidate of their choice. The greatness of America is that there is enough money on both sides to make it interesting. And I would rather it come down to money than force.

Capitalism is the greatest thing on earth..

But Corporatism runs America now, and that has to change..

[john230]

Yes they don't, but they do. Case in point the resurgence and then the descent of Newt, think about it. It is almost unbelievable how he has shot up and then down and all because of money. Your point about life being unfair is valid, no doubt. However, maybe a democracy should care about making life as fair as possible. Very little can be done about the guy who lives in a mansion and the guy living in a trailer. But, with legislation a civilized country could at least attempt to make life as fair as possible and regulating money in an election could be one way of accomplishing this.

I am an independent who believes that the extremes on both sides are dangerous. I just read an article today about a casino magnate that is funding Newt's PAC. He's pouring millions into it. Both Romney and Newt are playing the same game. May the better man win. Just like I think people should be able to purchase what they can afford, I believe they can support the candidate of their choosing with whatever they can afford. Both the Democrats and Republican are in bed with Big money. If you want to do away with that, you have to rid the whole system of it. Don't see how that is possible in a capitalistic society.

[muldoon]

I am an independent who believes that the extremes on both sides are dangerous. I just read an article today about a casino magnate that is funding Newt's PAC. He's pouring millions into it. Both Romney and Newt are playing the same game. May the better man win. Just like I think people should be able to purchase what they can afford, I believe they can support the candidate of their choosing with whatever they can afford. Both the Democrats and Republican are in bed with Big money. If you want to do away with that, you have to rid the whole system of it. Don't see how that is possible in a capitalistic society.

You're referring to Sheldon Adelson (Venetian in Vegas). His primary focus regardless of who gets his next dump of money, is Israel. And to be more accurate, it's just ONE of Newt's PACs.

A little more on Sheldon....

The billionaire casino mogul who has breathed new life into Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign with millions of dollars in donations is facing a federal investigation over whether his company violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits bribing foreign officials.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1ks3CFCPe

You make it sound like there's only way.

If a guy like George Soros or Donald Trump or Bloomberg wanted to buy every open ad in a TV market so that no one else can advertise - you think that's ok because it should be a capitalist marketplace during an election?

[ABEHONEST]

Laura would never mention Ron Paul! She wouldn't want to threaten her income from Bill O and Foxnews.

[john230]

You're referring to Sheldon Adelson (Venetian in Vegas). His primary focus regardless of who gets his next dump of money, is Israel. And to be more accurate, it's just ONE of Newt's PACs.

You make it sound like there's only way.

If a guy like George Soros or Donald Trump or Bloomberg decides to buy every open ad in a TV market so that no one else can advertise - you think that's ok because it should be a capitalist marketplace during an election?

Did not intend to infer Newt has only 1 Pac. I think the point you are missing is that both the left and right have money. So why should not they not be allowed to spend it? I am not sure how the ad buying happens for TV, but do not forget the power of the internet and the debates. TV ads are important, but not the end all. Is it feasible to take capitalism out of politics in a capitalistic society? Don't know.

[dante1]

I am an independent who believes that the extremes on both sides are dangerous. I just read an article today about a casino magnate that is funding Newt's PAC. He's pouring millions into it. Both Romney and Newt are playing the same game. May the better man win. Just like I think people should be able to purchase what they can afford, I believe they can support the candidate of their choosing with whatever they can afford. Both the Democrats and Republican are in bed with Big money. If you want to do away with that, you have to rid the whole system of it. Don't see how that is possible in a capitalistic society.

Valid point and I have no rebuttal, but I am thinking. lol

[muldoon]

Did not intend to infer Newt has only 1 Pac. I think the point you are missing is that both the left and right have money. So why should not they not be allowed to spend it? I am not sure how the ad buying happens for TV, but do not forget the power of the internet and the debates. TV ads are important, but not the end all. Is it feasible to take capitialism out of politics in a capitalistic society? Don't know.

If your point is that both sides have money, then I think this was a waste of a thread, since the fact that everyone is flooded with ads on tv and online - pretty much spelled out that point.

If your point is that it's ok for people to buy unbalanced access to candidates and influence policy and campaigns, because they can afford it, with little or no accountability, then I completely disagree.

General Electric is not a person. Yet they are essentially treated as such when it comes to being able to influence the government. They spend 39 million lobbying US government officials, but $0 in US taxes?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisbarth/2011/12/14/29-companies-that-paid-millions-for-lobbying-and-didnt-pay-taxes/

This is Capitalism where it pertains to dealings with government - and you seem ok with it.

[john230]

If your point is that both sides have money, then I think this was a waste of a thread, since the fact that everyone is flooded with ads on tv and online - pretty much spelled out that point.

If your point is that it's ok for people to buy unbalanced access to candidates and influence policy and campaigns, because they can afford it, with little or no accountability, then I completely disagree.

General Electric is not a person. Yet they are essentially treated as such when it comes to being able to influence the government. They spend 39 million lobbying US government officials, but $0 in US taxes?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisbarth/2011/12/14/29-companies-that-paid-millions-for-lobbying-and-didnt-pay-taxes/

This is Capitalism where it pertains to dealings with government - and you seem ok with it.

Some good points.
I think this quote by Ronald Reagan sums it up best. " It has been said that Politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first."

[ABEHONEST]

Great wisdom from Ronald Reagan. Is he the original speaker of this quote? Can't top this one.

[john230]

Great wisdom from Ronald Reagan. Is he the original speaker of this quote? Can't top this one.

I think so, but not certain.

[Shafted69]

Great wisdom from Ronald Reagan. Is he the original speaker of this quote? Can't top this one.

With his great wisdom he raised taxes 11 times & tripled the national Debt!

All Hail To Raygun.

[Sam Odom]

In September:

The price of a gal of Gasoline & Milk
Unemployment #
General Welfare

Will determine the next president

[andywend]

With his great wisdom he raised taxes 11 times & tripled the national Debt!

All Hail To Raygun.

So when a republican raises taxes and the national debt, its a bad thing but when a democrat (i.e. Obama) calls for tax increases and is responsible for an explosion in the national debt, its a good thing?

Shafted, do you oppose tax increases or support them?

Do you oppose increases in the national debt or support it?

Or does your answers to these questions vary depending on the political affiliation of a president who does these things?
<!-- / message --><!-- sig --><!-- / sig -->

[Balco10]

"a bunch of us sitting next to each other at an Obama Washington dinner, prominent conservatives and cabinet members, we are looking at each other saying I don't know if Romney can beat him, because the Obama operation is really smart and will run a good campaign" this is coming from a real conservative. Oh my, some people on the right are even casting doubts. I have never heard this from the other side in a Presidential campaign.

Gingrich is probably done again, maybe a third comeback but it is doubtful. Romney beat him by tossing around negative stuff with a ton of unanswered money. Whether your like Newt or not is this the way you want a candidate to win. Money, money, money it doesn't seem fair. Election laws should be changed. If the most money wins. WoW!

Dante...understand that either GOP is 100X better than Obama!

[Balco10]

In September:

The price of a gal of Gasoline & Milk
Unemployment #
General Welfare

Will determine the next president

Indeed! Another Obama spells an economic
collaspese.

[Balco10]

Sorry buy Obama is a dictator!

[19th Hole]

Sorry buy Obama is a dictator!

[mikejamm]

Vote for Newt, he wants to build a space station on the moon!
Vote for Romney, he'll outlaw all other religions and put rich mormons in charge of everything! Yea, no more sending money to the Federal government and the IRS. The mormon tax means all your money goes to the mormon church, just like the royals over there in merry 'ol England mate!

[ABEHONEST]

What would a poker-playing fanatic like you know about political candidates?

[Shafted69]

So when a republican raises taxes and the national debt, its a bad thing but when a democrat (i.e. Obama) calls for tax increases and is responsible for an explosion in the national debt, its a good thing?

Shafted, do you oppose tax increases or support them?

Do you oppose increases in the national debt or support it?

Or does your answers to these questions vary depending on the political affiliation of a president who does these things?
<!-- / message --><!-- sig --><!-- / sig -->

Andy, the right wing blowhard, from the party of fiscal conservatism when out of power, but spend like drunken sailors when in power, is preaching about hypocrisy?



So when a republican raises taxes and explodes the national debt, its a good thing but when a democrat (i.e. Obama) calls for tax increases on millionaires & billionaires to help pay down debt, its a bad thing?

[dante1]

Sorry buy Obama is a dictator!

Balco, are you a really heavy drinker? Just curious, I often don't understand wtf you are writing.

[rkelly110]

Look boys, it's not our jobs to think. Our electee's suck us off and then do our thinking
for us. They all of a sudden think they are the man behind the curtain.

How many of us would approve of 1/2 the shit those morons pass? If we can get the
big boys to play with us, we might have a chance. IE: internet sites shutting down
for that NADA shit.

Business' are taking notice not to fck with us. BkofAma learned their lesson as did Verizon.

Please, if we discuss something in here the govt is doing, that pisses you off, write
to your representative. Together we can make a difference.