Whovian
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,153
- Reaction score
- 2,250
- Location
- dimensionally transcendental
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The FEC has been asked for exactly that. The C of C may not have to answer for who their donors are, but they will need to prove, thru reasonable accounting practices, that foreign donations have not been used to purchase political ads.
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/1/the-chamber-and-foreign-contributions/
Until the FEC completes its investigation, your demand for proof is unreasonable. Lack of proof at this point doesn't make the accusation illegitimate, since the C of C does accept donations from foreign corporations. It is the C of C that must provide proof to the FEC, NOT the Dems to you.
Regards from Rosie
Barbbtx said:Myth: The U.S. Chamber is spending foreign money on political activities. ... that labor unions and their allies far outspend business on election efforts. .... Unions - 12.4% percent of employees at foreign companies in the U.S. are ...
Myth vs. Fact: Foreign Money and Political Spending | U.S. Chamber of Commerce
So, you agree with me that citing unsourced claims (like the Democrats are doing in this case) and not presenting actual evidence (again, like the Democrats in this case) is a game. Nice to here.Are you seriously trying to vindicate the Chamber of Commerce by citing their own unsourced claims? If so, then allow me to indulge in this game myself. Fact: I am a 7-foot-tall satyr married to Scarlett Johansson. Hmm, apparently making the claim didn't make it so. Oh well.
Are you seriously trying to vindicate the Chamber of Commerce by citing their own unsourced claims? If so, then allow me to indulge in this game myself. Fact: I am a 7-foot-tall satyr married to Scarlett Johansson. Hmm, apparently making the claim didn't make it so. Oh well.
Has the FEC actually launched an investigation?
Again, you go back to 'they have to prove what the Dems claimed isn't true'... instead of the more proper 'the Dem's should provide evidence for their claims'. Sad.
so have the msm's, altho obama is so alien to american politics he obviously didn't see it coming
time mag---over his head, insular, isolated, arrogant and clueless
ny times---no evidence CoC's collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, the afl-cio and sierra club and nra have international affiliations and take in money from foreign entities while pushing political causes in the us, more than 160 pac's set up by corporations are based overseas
where ya been, the WHITE HOUSE and the DEMOCRATIC NATL COMMITTEE are doing quite a bit more about this nefarious use of foreign money by the chamber of commerce to "steal our democracy" than the mere asking of questions
is that all ya got?
no mention of last friday's jobs report, for example?
They must investigate since Senator Franken has called for it. The D of J putting in their two cents is more an administrative detailing rather than a directive.
Quickly dismissive, aintcha? LOLOL
Regards from Rosie
They must investigate since Senator Franken has called for it. The D of J putting in their two cents is more an administrative detailing rather than a directive.
Quickly dismissive, aintcha? LOLOL
Regards from Rosie
I think they should have the right to defend themselves against the claims of the Obama administration.
Where was I dismissive? I asked if an actual investigation had begun? Touchy? Aintcha? LOLOL
Irrelevant.
You're really not very good at this, are you.Silly man. The Chamber actually is going to have to prove the Dems' claims are untrue, thru reasonable accounting procedures. To dismiss this fact quickly and claim the opposite, that the Dems must prove what the Chamber did or did not do, jumped the gun, the shark and a buncha other things, too. :roll:
Regards from Rosie
Silly man. The Chamber actually is going to have to prove the Dems' claims are untrue, thru reasonable accounting procedures. To dismiss this fact quickly and claim the opposite, that the Dems must prove what the Chamber did or did not do, jumped the gun, the shark and a buncha other things, too. :roll:
Regards from Rosie
Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or appeal to ignorance, is an informal logical fallacy; it asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option: there is insufficient data and the proposition has not yet been proven to be either true or false.[1] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof.
General forms of the argument:
P has never been disproven therefore P is/(must be) true.
P has never been proven therefore P is/(must be) false.
Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There is no proof of the allegations put forth by Obama.Irrelevant. The Chamber's claims would be easily sourced if they were legitimate, but it's not that kind of party with those people - they're not in the business of discussion. They're in the business of perpetuating ideas that serve their interests, whether true or false.
you're apparently commenting on an alternate universe where people care what the MSM says.
They were saying pretty much the same thing during the election.
I haven't seen it
There is no proof of the allegations put forth by Obama.
Would you feel better if the Rep. party was receiving money from untraceable, pre-paid, reloadable credit cards like Obama did?
The defense of a Mafia attorney. Not "it isn't true," just "you can't prove it." And regardless of whether that's the case, we have every reason to suspect they're funded in this way, and they refuse to even verbally address it let alone open up their books. No, they're an attack-dog organization, and they prefer to be the ones going after others - they're not comfortable being in the spotlight.
I don't even know what you're talking about. The fact is the Republican Party has unlimited support: The media gives its propaganda unlimited airplay, treats its most deranged claims, evasions, and outright lies as legitimate arguments, and perpetuates myths that serve its agenda. They don't even need to buy airtime - practically everything packaged as "news" is run through a filter to remove any "liberal bias" that might come from honest journalism. It's a miracle that a Democrat ever gets a word in edgewise with six thousand phony newspapers and radio shows all spewing the same GOP talking points. Barack Obama won a landslide victory in 2008 with half the media declaring on a daily basis that he was doomed, and the other half interpreting everything that happened as evidence that he was "in trouble." The GOP, the media, and Wall Street are a single entity.
Could you give us a list of the "GOP media" Please?
j-mac
So the Obama administration can make any claim they wish without substance to back it up, and even if the victim of their claims tries to refute the accusation it is irrelevant? That is some nice system you got there. I suppose that wouldn't work if repubs used it on demo's though.
j-mac
You're actually claiming that the majority of mass media has a conservative bias?I don't even know what you're talking about. The fact is the Republican Party has unlimited support: The media gives its propaganda unlimited airplay, treats its most deranged claims, evasions, and outright lies as legitimate arguments, and perpetuates myths that serve its agenda. They don't even need to buy airtime - practically everything packaged as "news" is run through a filter to remove any "liberal bias" that might come from honest journalism. It's a miracle that a Democrat ever gets a word in edgewise with six thousand phony newspapers and radio shows all spewing the same GOP talking points. Barack Obama won a landslide victory in 2008 with half the media declaring on a daily basis that he was doomed, and the other half interpreting everything that happened as evidence that he was "in trouble." The GOP, the media, and Wall Street are a single entity.
A pack of corporations anonymously ganging up on American democracy does not strike me as "political opposition" so much as an attempt to buy election outcomes, but for the moment it's true to say we don't know where their funding comes from. It is also true to say that campaign finance law as corrupted by the ironically-labeled "Citizens United" Supreme Court decision would permit them to accept unlimited amounts of money from foreign sources for the purpose of waging crazed smear campaigns against Democrats.
So what do you think of the secret donations given to the Obama campaign in 2008?
Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations
So what do you think of the secret donations given to the Obama campaign in 2008?
Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations
Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed.
Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.
The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.
.....
Lawyers for the Obama operation said yesterday that their "extensive back-end review" has carefully scrubbed contributions to prevent illegal money from entering the operation's war chest.
...
Juan Proaño, whose technology firm handled online contributions for John Edwards's presidential primary campaign, and for John F. Kerry's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee in 2004, said it is possible to require donors' names and addresses to match those on their credit card accounts. But, he said, some campaigns are reluctant to impose that extra layer of security.
...
Election lawyer Brett Kappel said the FEC has never grappled with the question of cash cards. "The whole system is set up for them to accept the payment, then determine whether it is legal or not. And if it's not, send it back. That's what the statute requires," he said.
And you have what as proof, besides your own personal opinion? Please share your evidence.Try "almost certainly is."
Really? Scared? How so? They've publicly denied the accusations, not hid from the issue. How exactly are they 'scared'?The Chamber of Commerce sure seems to be, now that people are asking questions.
This is your 'factual statement'...Let me understand this: A factually correct statement is a "conspiracy theory" because you find the terminology morally judgmental?
Again, as no one has offered proof, it is hardly factual. In fact, I'm not sure you've made a factual statement since you began posting here.A pack of corporations anonymously ganging up on American democracy
Every word you utter proves more and more how much a complete partisan hack you are.A corporation is just a tool, and it has legitimate uses. But organizations like the Chamber of Commerce represent people who abuse corporations to undermine the civic foundations of this country.
That, like most of your other posts, makes no sense what so ever.They seem ethical enough to piss off the Chamber of Commerce.
the entire board.Who is "us"?
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?