- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 25,893
- Reaction score
- 12,484
- Location
- New York, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Brad Woodhouse, spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, is the latest ally of President Obama to go after the dangers of undisclosed money in the political process. In a letter sent yesterday to editorial board members at news organizations across the country, Mr. Woodhouse excoriated the collection and use of the money in the current elections. “Anonymous special interests and unnamed corporations are pouring tens of millions of dollars into electoral politics this fall, money that has the potential to tip the scales in close races across the country,” Mr. Woodhouse wrote in the letter. He lamented the “pernicious effects of secret, special interest money.”
But just a couple of years back, Mr. Woodhouse was the president of a political organization that took donations without disclosing the identities of the donors. Mr. Woodhouse was president of Americans United for Change, a liberal group that says its mission has been to challenge “the far-right conservative voices and ideas that for too long have been mistaken for mainstream American values.”
It's their last straw in an election that isn't about Cult, Text Messages, or one of their trick wabbits. Not even the press can dent the nationwide express train ripping through the nation... to get Government Off Our Backs.D.N.C. Spokesman's Former Group Didn't Disclose Donors Either - NYTimes.com
Once again, nothing about the current political situation is new. The same people are just doing the same things they always do.
D.N.C. Spokesman's Former Group Didn't Disclose Donors Either - NYTimes.com
Once again, nothing about the current political situation is new. The same people are just doing the same things they always do.
Mr. Woodhouse said the comparison was unfair. He said Americans United for Change did not run the same kind of political advertising that Crossroads GPS and the other conservative groups were financing.
“We didn’t do any advertising that mentioned or attacked candidates like the kind Karl Rove is running during the election — so we didn’t do the type of ads that we are highlighting here,” Mr. Woodhouse said Friday.
Not exactly, from your link:
Thanks for biting.
A commercial aired by Woodhouse's group. Yea, that definitely didn't mention or attack anyone.
“We didn’t do any advertising that mentioned or attacked candidates like the kind Karl Rove is running during the election — so we didn’t do the type of ads that we are highlighting here,” Mr. Woodhouse said Friday.
Were they baseless lies, Right?
Please note what I quoted above:
I am assuming Mr. Woodhouse meant the ads were in fact based upon the truth.
Ah, so if the ads that the CoC is running are not factually inaccurate, you don't have any problem with them? You're not opposed to groups refusing to disclose their donors, you just don't like it when they don't tell the truth? Seems plausible.
If you're that intent on finding a way to justify what this guy said/did rather than simply admitting "yea, it sounds like both sides play politics," then I can add this to the long list of things that it's not worth discussing with you.
My point boils down to this. If a corporation or union wants to run ads for or against a candidate, the public has the right to know who paying for the ads.
I believe in sunlight whether it's on the left or right.
Tell me was Justice Alito correct during the SOTU message?
My point boils down to this. If a corporation or union wants to run ads for or against a candidate, the public has the right to know who paying for the ads. I believe in sunlight whether it's on the left or right. If XYZ corporation runs an ad against pbrauer, then the XYZ Corp. needs to take responsibility for it. I think we know XYZ doesn't want to be known as the sponsor because they might lose business from the public.
Tell me was Justice Alito correct during the SOTU message?
Yes, he was absolutely correct.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...times-greenhouse-alito-right-obama-wrong.html
Alito Was Right | Foreign Policy
Watch the video again, Justice Alito starts shaking his head and saying "not true" when the President says "open the flood gates to the special interests" and before he says "including foreign corporations." Notice the video that Grim posted (but incorrectly formatted) of Sean Hannity / Sarah Palin where that part was purposely cropped out by Sean Hannity.
Does the Citizens United decision "open the flood gates to special interests" or doesn't it? Was Justice Alito absolutely correct?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?