Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

House Dems to blast U.S. Chamber's ads as foreign-influenced

House Democrats in tough races are being advised by Dem leaders to seize on new revelations about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's foreign fundraising to defend themselves against the Chamber's ad onslaught -- another sign of just how urgent it is for Dems to counter the massive ad spending disparity they're up against.

A senior Democratic strategist tells me that embattled incumbents and candidates are being instructed to seize on yesterday's Think Progress report, which raised questions as to whether the money the Chamber raises from foreign companies is being used to help bankroll its multimillion-dollar campaign against Democrats.

House Dems and candidates who are being bludgeoned by Chamber ads will start raising the specter of foreign money rigging our elections as a way to fight back against the ads.

"Every single House Democrat being attacked by the Chamber of Commerce should use this extraordinary revelation to their benefit," one strategist involved in charting House race strategy tells me.

"It makes a huge difference to people on Main Street if they know the Chamber ads are bought and paid for by Foreign owned companies that want to export American jobs," the strategist continues. "Our guys need to go for the jugular on this and this news offers them a pretty sharp knife."

One embattled Dem, Rep. Tom Perriello of Virginia, has already hit back against Chamber ads set to run in his district, describing them as un-American. "This latest move is beyond outrageous, to being fundamentally un-American and un-democratic, I'm just outraged," he told a local news outlet, calling on his Republican opponent to renounce the Chamber's ads. More will follow.

Separately, Sam Stein reports that similar tactics are already being used by Dem Senate candidates.

The Chamber has adamantly denied that any money raised from foreign companies is being used to fund ads here, claiming to have a process in place to prevent this. But there's no way of verifying whether this is the case, and the Chamber has aggressively fought Congressional efforts to force the kind of disclosure that would shed light on such activities. And as many others have already pointed out, money is "fungible."

The new campaign by Dems, which smacks of an effort to make lemons into lemonade, is another measure of the massive disadvantage Dems face in the uncharted post-Citizens United world. And it remains to be seen how much concerted efforts to raise questions about insidious foreign influence over our elections will do to counter the right's massive edge.

UPDATE, 2:17 p.m.: Only Perriello has used the word "un-American" thus far; I've edited the hed to reflect that.

By Greg Sargent  | October 6, 2010; 2:06 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Campaign finance  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sharron Angle's 'Willie Horton' ad
Next: U.S. Chamber broadens attack on Think Progress, alleges Soros-funded plot to silence business

Comments

This strategy will be a complete failure. Few people know that the ads they see are being paid for by the Chamber. There isn't enough time left for counter ads to have any impact.

Posted by: johnyt1977 | October 6, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"This strategy will be a complete failure. Few people know that the ads they see are being paid for by the Chamber. There isn't enough time left for counter ads to have any impact."

Yeah, so just bend over and take it. This is defeatist crap. Perriello has the right idea. Each Dem rep in trouble has to reach back and find their hidden Alan Grayson and pound, pound, pound. The Chamber of Commerce and their GOP errand boys have been out to destroy the middle class since Reagan came to DC. It's been class warfare, and when the Right throws that term around they have it half-assed backwards.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 6, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

@Greg: "The new campaign by Dems... is another measure of the massive disadvantage Dems face in the uncharted post-Citizens United world."

Is the Chamber doing something now that would not have been permitted pre-Citizens? 501Cs did not exist pre-Citizens?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 6, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

I already replied to this topic in a previous thread -

To summarize

Obama pulled OUT of the campaign finance system in 2008 - which resulted in a $600 Million advantage for himself and Congressional democrats in that election cycle.


So why can't the Republicans come up with their own loopholes - to try to EVEN UP THE SCORE ???


And the money the Republicans are getting is a FRACTION of the advantage that Obama put together last time - $600 Million.


That advantage helped the democrats in many congressional races too - and helped the democrats get to 60 votes in the Senate - especially when it came to races in Georgia and Minnesota.


So the DEMOCRATS HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS - they have no right to claim foul.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

""The new campaign by Dems, which smacks of an effort to make lemons into lemonade, is another measure of the massive disadvantage Dems face in the uncharted post-Citizens United world.

And it remains to be seen how much concerted efforts to raise questions about insidious foreign influence over our elections will do to counter the right's massive edge.""
===============
Did you have the same complaint when democrats doubled the spending of republicans in 2008?

How about that Obama refusing public funding to gain a huge financial advantage is the biggest "violation" of the intent of campaign finance reform?

Maybe Kagan and the deputy shouldn't have made arguments for banning books and pamphlets with the law. Don't blame the SCOTUS for shooting down banning books.

www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205.pdf

www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205%5BReargued%5D.pdf

Posted by: Cryos | October 6, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

sbj -- I was making a more general point, that Dems are doing everything they can to try to fight back against the tide of spending that Citizens United has enabled.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 6, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

sbj3 at 2:28 PM writes

Is the Chamber doing something now that would not have been permitted pre-Citizens? 501Cs did not exist pre-Citizens?

_______________________

Excellent question - and that question also can be applied to what the 527s were allowed to do.


I would guess the answer is starting in the 1990s, Republicans and democrats were using 527s for issue ads.


The line between "issue ads" and "direct-advocacy ads" became so blurred that there really was no practical difference.

So If your question was pre-Citizens, could a corporation put funds in a 527 and go right up to the line of issue advocacy to advertise in a Federal Election

The answer is YES - they could do it and they did do it.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

sbj -- I was making a more general point, that Dems are doing everything they can to try to fight back against the tide of spending that Citizens United has enabled.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 6, 2010 2:32 PM
=============
Fair enough.

In my opinion I think the overreach by democrats to try to apply the law to allowing the banning of books is what really shot them down.

It is rare the SCOTUS has rearguments I think in this case they gave the time for the government to back off but when they came back with banning pamphlets without clear definition they knew they had to act.

Posted by: Cryos | October 6, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

"Did you have the same complaint when democrats doubled the spending of republicans in 2008?"

Yeah, they doubled it with small individual donations, many of them from the internet. What's going on right now is we have mega donors with their own agenda, which has nothing to do with helping the overall economy and the American people. They hide and refuse to stand up and make their donations a matter of public record. Maybe they are afraid of a backlash - do yah think???

Posted by: filmnoia | October 6, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

In addition Greg sorry to sometimes let my emotions cloud my posts. Glad some of them do get deleted.

There are good points in both sides so I'll try to keep to productive civil disagreement when warranted.

Posted by: Cryos | October 6, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

ALL,


This conversation can not take place without an HONEST ASSESSMENT of what the Clinton people and the DNC and its allies did with CHINESE AND INDONESIAN MONEY around the 1996 election.


Let's just be honest - lay out the facts of what EACH PARTY has been doing over the years - what loopholes they have OPENED UP to wreck the INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION.


Foreign money - take a look into what the democrats did in 1996 - AND the credit care controls of Obama in 2008.


If those assessments do not come into the conversation NO ONE CAN BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY - INCLUDING BABY-FACE VAN HOLLEN.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

thanks cryos, hope others follow suit.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 6, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

The Free Trade deals have to be revised.

Everyone should agree that Foreign money should not be in the campaign finance system.

But to suddenly single out the Chamber of Commerce - there has to be a question of scale here.

AND no one ever heard back about the allegations of FOREIGN CREDIT CARDS GIVING CONTRIBUTIONS TO OBAMA IN 2008.


The democrats can't do what they did in 2008 - and use the $700 Million to gain majorities in Congress - and then turn around and say a FRACTION OF THAT AMOUNT is somehow out-of-bounds.

This is just another dud issue for the democrats.

The democrats do NOT have clean hands.

The Tea Party keeps on saying that the Republicans in Washington "lost their way" - they didn't do what they were supposed to do.


Well - the same can be said of the democrats - the democrats on Main Street did NOT elect the democrats in Washington to go do what they have been doing over the past 20 years -


The democrats AGREED to the FREE TRADE DEALS - that is the problem with the Foreign Money


HOW CAN ANYONE TAKE THESE GUYS SERIOUSLY ?

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Let's just be honest - lay out the facts of what EACH PARTY has been doing over the years - what loopholes they have OPENED UP to wreck the INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION.
==============
I do agree with this.

I however do expect blogs to express the view of the author that is what they are there for. Liberal, conservative, everything in between.

It is the "news" sections of the majority of our media willing to express outright bias that is painting an unfair picture.

Posted by: Cryos | October 6, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The Chamber has adamantly denied that any money raised from foreign companies is being used to fund ads here, claiming to have a process in place to prevent this. But there's no way of verifying whether this is the case, and the Chamber has aggressively fought Congressional efforts to force the kind of disclosure that would shed light on such activities. And as many others have already pointed out, money is "fungible."


_________________________________


Let's go back and review the CREDIT CARD CONTRIBUTIONS TO OBAMA IN 2008.

Let's see how many were from FOREIGN SOURCES.

The banks can tell you where the credit cards are from.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

It was all Foreign Money that funded Bush/Cheney's two wars. They borrowed trillions in foreign money, to finance their two massive failures.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

As soon as I see all caps, I know to scroll on. Thanks for the hint.

The Chamber has a process in place to avoid foreign corporations paying for ads. What a load of hooey. If they're swimming in dough, no matter where they stash it, they have plenty to bankroll Republicans.

They're disgusting and un-American.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 6, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Cryos at 2:50 PM

I have no problems with opinions - however those should be based on a fair assessment of what the facts are.

If an opinion is based on a bunch of half-truths - the other side is within-bounds to point that out.


You really can't have one side YELLING about foreign money - when their party has been taking in foreign money for a LONG TIME - and I cite the allegations into Bill Clinton, the DNC and the democratic groups coming from 1996.


AND everything else that has gone on...

I say REVISE the Free Trade Deals -

But that gets difficult when foreign money is coming in.

AND I have pointed out the Wall Street MONEY going to the democrats and the idea that Hillary running in New York for Senate twice and a Presidential run


The DEMOCRATS SOLD YOU OUT

Don't forget it.


.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

RACE RELATIONS


A national telephone survey finds that just 36% of voters now say relations between blacks and whites are getting better. That’s down from 62% in July of last year at the height of the controversy involving a black Harvard professor and a white policeman. That number had fallen only slightly to 55% in April of this year.
______________________

Obama's OWN ACTIONS have caused race relations to go backwards.

Add to that all the False Charges of Racism that democrats have made.


The American People are much more MATURE about race relations than Obama and the democrats have proven to be.

I can just say this: the democrats have HURT RACE RELATIONS for a generation -

So, even on that issue, Obama has FAILED.

______________________

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 6, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Richard Nixon went to China and sold us out to Mao. That is where it all started.

I wonder if Christine O'Donnell got a peek into the Chamber of Commerce Top Secret files, and that is how she discovered that China was plotting to take over America.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

The resident Forest Creature is in fine form today. Let him rave.

Perhaps; people might just want to copy a stock response from Craig Ferguson's Robot Skeleton Sidekick;

and just respond to every STRF diatribe with a simple;

In Your Pants!!!

Try it. I bet it will vent your frustration, and make you feel better.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats are right about this. The Roberts Supreme Court opened the way for foreign companies and companies which have shipped U.S. jobs overseas to flood U.S. election campaigns with money.

Congress--Pass a law making campaign donors identify themselves explicitly, clearly and openly on every ad. No more hiding behind the Chamber of Commerce and other groups like this.

It is enough that these companies have stolen our jobs and destroyed our middle class. They shouldn't be able to hide their political contributions too.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | October 6, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

filmnonia ignores something important. The unions spent massively on Obama. Massively. As in millions here in Ohio alone.

Now the Democrats are doing their undies in a wad squad routine about the citizens decision. It makes little sense to me. Why should one group of citizens, organized as unions be free to say what they please while another group of citizens, organized as corporations are not equally free.

the "arguments" about disparity in cash or even foreign money doesn't offset the basic principle here. If we're free, we're free to say what we want especially during political campaigns.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 6, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse

I find it incredible that people are so easily manipulated by formulaic campaign ads:

[Somber/sinister music, black/white grainy film, slow motion, worst possible "up close" image of face] "John Smith and Nancy Pelosi want to kill your kittens and sell your children to illegal immigrant Mexican vampires."

[Cheerful music, high resolution color film at full speed, pictures of smiling candidate with family and babies] "But Sam Jones will save your pets and ensure that your children all grow up successful, marry well, and give you lots of grandkids."

Both parties do it, and it is insulting and obnoxious. Thankfully, there aren't many reasons to have a television turned on.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 6, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

I turn on my TV only to check and see if Craig Ferguson will open with the Cussin' White Bunny, and just to hear his skeleton sidekick say to STRF: "In Your Pants!!!"

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Great! This one needs to be pushed hard until citizens actually get the ramifications of elections dominated by the very wealthy whether foreign or domestic. But pushing the foreign aspect will probably be far more effective.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 6, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1 - Actually the Tea Partiers are anti-puppy.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/missouri_tea_partiers_joe_the_plumber_join_movemen_1.php

Posted by: PaciolisRevenge | October 6, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Has there been an concrete proof offered, to back up the claims that the chamber is using foreign contributions? I just want to be sure that neither side gets carried away with playing the Xenophobia card.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

All, the Chamber is now going nuclear on Think Progress:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/us_chamber_broadens_attack_on.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 6, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse


bearclaw1 - Actually the Tea Partiers are anti-puppy.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/missouri_tea_partiers_joe_the_plumber_join_movemen_1.php

Posted by: PaciolisRevenge | October 6, 2010 4:07 PM

Actually, Joe The Plumber and his Tea Party Patriots are pro puppy life. The more the merrier, and that is why they are against restricting puppy mills.

We Democrats, on the other hand, are pro-choice, and support planned puppyhood.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

"filmnonia ignores something important. The unions spent massively on Obama. Massively. As in millions here in Ohio alone"

I'm not ignoring it. They did it openly. How dare they try to save jobs for their members! What's going on here are big corporate entities who refuse to identify themselves while they try to destroy the middle class by shipping jobs overseas. I agree with tinyjab40 that there ought to be a law where campaign donors need to identify themselves. However, it probably won't happen since our system has been rotten to the core for at least 150 years.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 6, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Thanks to the hideous Citizens United decision that the activist right wing Supreme Court justices passed recently, the Extremist Republican party has the far right wing oil billionaire Koch Brothers and their front man KKKarl Rove out buying Senate and House seats all over America right now.

Posted by: DrainYou | October 6, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

ThinkProgress.org has done some exceptional reporting on this, I recommend a look.

If the folks that sponsor the ads feel strongly about their positions, why the anonymity? The name of this legislation is bogus, it should have been Global Citizens United to Trash US Elections. Pathetic.

Posted by: notfooledbydistractions1 | October 6, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Where was the loony liberal's concern when the teleprompter-reading monkey dropped public financing and took money that he couldn't trace back to the source? Liberals are hypocrites.

Posted by: mgrantham2 | October 6, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

@bearclaw: "Both parties do it, and it is insulting and obnoxious. Thankfully, there aren't many reasons to have a television turned on."

I can give you 3 good ones: Roku, Netflix, Hulu.

Done and done.

Ads? Where we're going, we don't need "ads".

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 6, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

holy talking points batman, I have to bring this one forward:
==================
If the unearned benefits you mention are soooo paltry, why is obesity the number one health problem among America's poor?"

Holy ignorance batman.

It's because the low-cost mass-produced "food" the poor tend to eat is calorie and fat-rich and nutrient and vitamin poor.

Let's just say that it's not because they stuff themselves on Chateaubriand.

=====================

So, are the poor in oh say Sri Lanka also suffering from obesity Ethan? How the poor in (insert name of third world country here)? Are they aslo obese because of fast food?

It is just too funny. The poor in America have enough money to live quite well. They are hardly poor by any international standard. So when an angry commenter demands that I live on the unearned benefits we ladle out as welfare I wonder if I'll wind up as porcine as the lady in front of me in the checkout line at the local 'hood food store. She "bought" the food stuffs that are approved by the food stamp program with her food stamps. She used her debit card for the beer and the case of ho ho's though.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 6, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

STR you obviuosly have never given a dime to a campaign. Each contribution has a box that is checked from the contributor stating under oath that the proceeds are your's, not from a business and not foreign proceeds that is checked and signed with each credit card charge contribution to the candidate and party.

Pre Citizens United disclaimers were required in each ad by third party with the source of those funding the ads. Secondly there were limits on the contributions and I believe under McCain Feingold those ads were prohibited during either the 30 or 60 day windown before an election.

Someone posted that there may only be $300,000 in foreign money with the Chamber. And how does that excuse the practice?
The frame should be Tell the GOP To Keep Foreign Money Out of Our Elections.

There is plenty of US money to waste; Meg has already blown $140 million in her likely losing bid to buy the Ca. Governor's office.

Posted by: leichtman1 | October 6, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

in response to this:
=======================
filmnonia ignores something important. The unions spent massively on Obama. Massively. As in millions here in Ohio alone"

I'm not ignoring it. They did it openly. How dare they try to save jobs for their members! What's going on here are big corporate entities who refuse to identify themselves while they try to destroy the middle class by shipping jobs overseas. I agree with tinyjab40 that there ought to be a law where campaign donors need to identify themselves. However, it probably won't happen since our system has been rotten to the core for at least 150 years.

======

Yeah, you're not ignoring it. I understand you just, ah, neglected to mention it, right? Just too funny. And BTW the unions got the best government money can buy. Obama paid the union off by hammering other legitimate claims against Chrsyler and the white collar workers at Delphi. Yup, the best government money can buy. What a heck of a deal. Obama gets an army of thugs and the thugs bosses get other people's money. Finger licking good, yumm!

the rest is just boilerplate whining. I do admire the nuance though. Instead of just demanding that free speech be stifled, the new whine o gram is about "identifying themselves" Yeah, that's a real problem, right? Why? The simple fact is that this is a strawman. The left wants speech of which they do not approve stifled. Period.

And thanks for the repetition of the Democrat/liberal talking points. I imagine that you feverently beleive them to be true. But they aren't. did some jobs go over seas? certainly they did. But the real change in America came from productivity. In fact America produces MORE manufactured goods now than at any point in our history. We just do it with fewer people. And the same thing will happen to the Chinese, the vietnamese, the africans and so forth. Robots do the work now. It is just that simple.

Do you trust AP? here's a quote from them:
"The U.S. by far remains the world’s leading manufacturer by value of goods produced. It hit a record $1.6 trillion in 2007 — nearly double the $811 billion in 1987. For every $1 of value produced in China’s factories, America generates $2.50.

this is NOT from AP, but the data is from the BLS:
"Using slightly different data than the AP article, the chart above shows U.S. Manufacturing Output (Gross Value) from The Federal Reserve, and U.S. Manufacturing Payroll Employment from the BLS (via Economagic), monthly from 1972-2009. In the last 37 years, manufacturing output in real dollars has more than doubled, while manufacturing employment has dropped by more than 26%, resulting in an almost tripling of the amount of manufacturing output per manufacturing worker in the U.S., from less than $80,000 in 1972 to almost $240,000 per worker today (see chart below)."

Here's the link :
http://www.economistblog.com/2009/02/22/made-in-usa-is-alive-and-well-manufacturing-goes-high-end-and-the-usa-is-still-the-global-lead

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 6, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Several people have commented on Citizens United but no one has responded to or taken on my VERY relevant posts.

Please give some feedback. Ignoring the truth of democrats arguing the ability to ban books using the law should concern everyone.

=====
Maybe Kagan and the deputy shouldn't have made arguments for banning books and pamphlets with the law. Don't blame the SCOTUS for shooting down banning books.

www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205.pdf

www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205%5BReargued%5D.pdf


In my opinion I think the overreach by democrats to try to apply the law to allowing the banning of books is what really shot them down.

It is rare the SCOTUS has rearguments I think in this case they gave the time for the government to back off but when they came back with banning pamphlets without clear definition they knew they had to act

Posted by: Cryos | October 6, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

China is still destroying is in the balance of trade figures. They manufacture massive amounts of consumer goods, and we import them. The factories that used to keep blue collar workers employed are almost all now overseas.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

omeone posted that there may only be $300,000 in foreign money with the Chamber. And how does that excuse the practice?
The frame should be Tell the GOP To Keep Foreign Money Out of Our Elections.

Posted by: leichtman1 | October 6, 2010 5:02 PM
=============
This doesn't make it right but just to put it in perspective,

- $300K is around the amount the Chinese Chief of Military Intelligence alone tried to contribute to Clinton in 96 with the Buddhist temple incident.

- Other democratic bundlers who have been convicted have been found guilty of being a funnel for foreign money


So limiting your criticism to the GOP is laughable.

I can't blame you though since the coverage between corruption and foreign influence of democrats vs republicans is appalling.

Posted by: Cryos | October 6, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Do not overlook the time Haley Barbour was discovered in Hong Kong, raising millions for the Republican National Campaign.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

The Chamber is un-American and essentially anti-American. They no longer represent American interests, but are in thrall to multinationals who have no flag. Corporatism equals fascism and they want a corporatist oligarchy in America. In essence, the end of the middle class.

Posted by: ElectricBill | October 6, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Jack Abramoff engaged in more Dirty Bundling With Republicans, that the New England Settlers ever did each Winter.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 6, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Once again, it always comes down to... Do you want Big Business to regulate our Government, or our Govt to regulate Big Business? That's the Republican - Democrat divide.

Posted by: jcluma | October 6, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

There was considerable evidence in 2008 that many contributions to the Obama campaign were made with pre-paid debit cards purchased overseas and with no verifiable US name or address associated with the "contributor". Not only that, but the Obama campaign encouraged these "small" contributions -- even if it was the same foreign "donor" buying $100,000 worth of debit cards and inventing phony names and addresses.

Posted by: JBaustian | October 6, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

The so-called "revelations" are from Think Progress, a house organ of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Zero credibility.

Posted by: CincinnatiRIck | October 6, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

The so-called "revelations" are from Think Progress, a house organ of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Zero credibility.

Posted by: CincinnatiRIck | October 6, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Bottom of the line, America will no longer function as we knew it..Everyday another company goes off shore, Everday another American loses his job (her job) Everyday another American child will have no home or Education,Everyday another Republican will scream from the rooftop about Democrat's ...Once all the money is in the Big Corporation's where will you work how will you feed your kids, forget about sending them to College they could not pay it off now anyway, we are all here fighting each other with rhetoric, you see as long as the RICH & Powerful CAN keep us fighting each other they just sock away more money, honestly how you can choose to keep the Rich in Power is beyond me, I will just get lambasted for my remarks so what who cares...right...Well when Americans have to leave AMERICA to get a job in Europe then you will have to take your families with you and America will just fade away...there is so much WILLFULL Ignorance on this site you see it just does not matter anymore..the right wants the rich to have all the power and money and the left would like the Middle class and poor to not be left out...so what is the answer? who know's ...But when you are all gone to Europe or China to work, it really won't matter much and the rest of us will be okay.

Posted by: janetmramos | October 6, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Before standing on a soapbox and decrying the use of foreign funds in American election campaigns, Democrats need to know that 1) the Chamber is actually raising funds from foreign sources, and 2) those funds are actually being used in the campaign. A report, from a liberal rag, is not proof. This whole issue has the same smell as the Gloria Alred/Weeping Nicky show, now being played in California. I see a backlash against so called progressives using ginned up information to smear their opponents.

Posted by: BenW2 | October 6, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

BenW2, You don't get it....it's over for you for me for all of us, America is doomed to be second rate and second class as long as you argue who's doin what with what...Dem's or Repub's ...we have been sold down the River, luckily i have money put away for my family...but who know's if that is safe either...fighting for the rich they don't care about you...and for that matter neither do i...

Posted by: janetmramos | October 6, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

@sbj3

You ask:

"Is the Chamber doing something now that would not have been permitted pre-Citizens? 501Cs did not exist pre-Citizens?"

The answer is YES!

Maybe you don't remember the hammering Al Gore took for his April,1996, appearance at the Buddhist Hsi Lai Temple in Hacienda Heights, California, when -- unknown to him -- alleged Chinese agents Maria Hsia and John Huang used the monks as straw donors to funnel money to the Clinton-Gore reelection campaign?

Direct foreign influence -- particularly financial involvement -- in US elections is illegal. It was illegal before Citizens United and it is illegal now.

Posted by: cdmomega | October 6, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

I always thought the CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WAS FOR THE PEOPLE
I was wrong WRONG

PEOPLE YES [[PEOPLE]] REGISTORED VOTERS
ARE TO ELECT OFFICIALS.
NOT CHAMBERS,CORPORATION, NONPROFIT CORPOATION, LABOR UNIONS,LOBBIST NOWAY,

NOVEMBER VOTE EVERYBODY PROTECT OUR RIGHTS.VOTE.DEMOCRATS,REPUBLICANS INDEPENDANTS EVEN TEAPARTY,BUT DON'T SELL YOUR VOTE BECAUSE SOME BIG ADD SAYS VOTE FOR-----
DON'T VOTE SOMEONE OUT-- FOR DOING WHAT IS RIGHT, OR BECAUSE ISN'T WHAT YOU WANT!!
DON'T VOTE GREEDY,SELFISH OR PARTY
VOTE WHAT WILL HELPOUR COUNTRY!!

Posted by: theoldmansays | October 7, 2010 12:06 AM | Report abuse

skipsailing28 wrote:

"So, are the poor in oh say Sri Lanka also suffering from obesity Ethan? How the poor in (insert name of third world country here)? Are they aslo obese because of fast food?

It is just too funny. The poor in America have enough money to live quite well. They are hardly poor by any international standard. So when an angry commenter demands that I live on the unearned benefits we ladle out as welfare I wonder if I'll wind up as porcine as the lady in front of me in the checkout line at the local 'hood food store. She "bought" the food stuffs that are approved by the food stamp program with her food stamps. She used her debit card for the beer and the case of ho ho's though."

First, your racism is appalling (the 'hood' food store?)and you aren't even the worst here.

Second, we are not talking about "international standards" here but, rather, American standards. We can even expand that to First World or developed nation standards and your silly comparison still collapses.

Sri Lankans and other Third World citizens do not have access to factory-farmed pork, beef and chicken, nor to sugar and/or salt, and/or transfat-laden breads, cereals, soda, canned vegetables, soups, processed cheeses and meats, etc. Food stamps must be budgeted just as money would be and their needing to be stretched for a month often results in the poorest cuts of meat and the cheapest, less healthy choices being the only options. That often leads to obesity and its associated ailments.

Third world poverty, on the other hand, results in severe malnutrition and even starvation. The problem there isn't low quality, high caloric foods, but little or no food. The options in the third world -- with food assistance -- are generally a daily portion of cheap grains such as rice.

And your phony indignation is cliche'. "How dare someone using food stamps also have actual money? How dare they have a scrap of disposable income? I am outraged that a food stamp recipient would have the wherewithal to choose to buy beer and HO-HOs!"

Food stamps are for food PURCHASE assistance, not food CHOICE assistance. In addition to benefitting the recipients, they also enhance the bottom lines of the corporations that make, market and sell the approved items. That is why the various industry associations lobby for that approval. Should the feds start approving specific items as opposed to catagories of foodstuffs, the uproar would be deafening.

And what were you doing in that "'hood food store" anyway? Or the "'hood" itself, for that matter? We all know what nefarious purposes take middle/upper class white guys to the 'hood. So what was it? Drugs? Prostitutes? Both?

So, how do YOU like being stereotyped?

Posted by: cdmomega | October 7, 2010 12:11 AM | Report abuse

The magical incantation of "racism!" no longer works pal. What I said wasn't racist, but you need it to be so you can attempt to stifle my speech. Won't work. I said nothing about the race of anybody so you're just engaging in typical liberal projection.

Tell ya what, when you get some, you know, like actual facts, try posting those. In the meantime everyone who bothered to read your regurgitation of liberal talking points wasted their precious time.

Oh, hey, meathead. I was in the 'hood grocery store because I live in the 'hood.

In you bigoted little mind all conservatives are older white guys living in gate guarded communities in the burbs. Sorry boy, but your bigotry is showing.

Want to see the real racists in America today? You need only look to the left.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 7, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

@ janetmramos

I absolutely get it. I live in California, where 80% of all state taxes go to paying the pay and benefits of public sector employees. How did things get that way? Public sector employees' unions, with the help of trade and other unions, using loopholes in election finance laws, have, for the most part, purchased the state Legislature - mostly Democrats, but a few Republicans as well. Without drastic change, the rest of the country will go down the same road - then we are lost. State and federal governments will continue to grow, until they suck every penny, out of every taxpayer, rich and poor. For the first time, in many years, there is a counter to public sector unions. While not perfect, it will slow the process.

Posted by: BenW2 | October 7, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

It's not a "strategy" if it proves true. And "the left" may not have time to counter with ads but if there's any decent media coverage it can have impact indeed.
But I find it ironic that the same coservatives who don't want "fer'ners" coming across the border don't mind foriegn governments possibly influencing our elections.

Posted by: libertyanne | October 7, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

It's not a "strategy" if it proves true. And "the left" may not have time to counter with ads but if there's any decent media coverage it can have impact indeed.
But I find it ironic that the same coservatives who don't want "fer'ners" coming across the border don't mind foriegn governments possibly influencing our elections.

Posted by: libertyanne | October 7, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Dems need to mention in their ads the fact that the chamber lobbied to block the disclosure legislation that is sitting in the senate and implore them to jam the phones and faxes and emails of their senator's offices to pass it.

Posted by: libertyanne | October 7, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company