Politics 2008

[THE KOD]

S. Carolina Black Leaders Back Clinton

Wednesday February 14, 2007 2:31 AM


AP Photo NHJC110, NHJC107

By JIM DAVENPORT

Associated Press Writer

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - Two key black political leaders in South Carolina who backed John Edwards in 2004 said Tuesday they are supporting Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

State Sens. Robert Ford and Darrell Jackson told The Associated Press they believe Clinton is the only Democrat who can win the presidency. Both said they had been courted by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama; Ford said Obama winning the primary would drag down the rest of the party.

``Then everybody else on the ballot is doomed,'' Ford said. ``Every Democratic candidate running on that ticket would lose because he's black and he's at the top of the ticket - we'd lose the House, the Senate and the governors and everything.''

``I'm a gambling man. I love Obama,'' Ford said. ``But I'm not going to kill myself.''

Ford said he was swayed by calls from former President Clinton and Hillary Clinton. He said she has solid support in Charleston, one of the key regions in the state with a significant black Democratic voting population.

Jackson, who also is the minister of a large church in the state's capital city, said Edwards - a South Carolina native who won the state's Democratic primary three years ago - had his chance.

``I feel as if he's had his opportunity,'' Jackson said.

The endorsements come just days before Obama and Clinton campaign in the state for the first time as 2008 candidates.

Support from black voters is key in South Carolina, where 49 percent of the Democratic presidential primary vote came from blacks in 2004. The state will host the first Southern primaries for both the GOP and Democrats in 2008.

Clinton's campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee said they were happy to have Ford and Jackson's support.

``We're grateful we're starting to get the support of some key leaders,'' Elleithee said.
..........................................................

Anyone hear this story this AM ?

Clinton paid Darrell Jacksons company called Sunshine , 10 k a month through 2008 for his endorsement .

Is this legal ?

So that what the 50 million in campaign funds is used for.

You buy votes, you buy endorsements, you win elections.

Sounds not like the American way.

Obama is looking better and better.

As long as I dont catch him smoking.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

before you get too involved in Barack Hussein Obama---you might want to question his credibilty-
Wonder how he answers this one---


The Wall Street Journal's Web site reports Obama had a history for voting "present" instead of "yes" or "no" as an Illinois state legislator ? and lists some major issues on which Obama declined to take a side. Among them, votes on bills to prohibit partial birth abortions, lower the penalty for carrying concealed weapons,require prosecution for the firing of a gun at or near a school, protect a child that survived a failed abortion, protect the identity of sex-abuse victims, and prohibit strip clubs and similar establishments from being close to schools, churches, and daycares.

But in his book, "The Audacity of Hope," Obama writes that as a legislator in the minority party, "You must vote 'yes' or 'no' on whatever bill comes up, with the knowledge that it's unlikely to be a compromise that either you or your supporters consider fair and or just."

 

[THE KOD]

Dogs

I am more interested in buying endorsement issues.

I think its criminal and should be proscecuted to the furthest extent of the law.

Now if Hillary were to contact me , and offer say
15k a month through 2008 . Lets see that would be $315,000 ..... I could provide my endorsement and post her picture on Madjacks and give her my undevided posting attention.

Yeh thats the ticket .

Could I go to jail for accepting money for endorsements . :shrug:

 

[THE KOD]

............................................................


10k a month, thats tiddling winks,

With 50 million , the big fish run deepest.

 

[THE KOD]

.......................................................

 

[THE KOD]

..........................................................

 

[THE KOD]

State Sens. Robert Ford and Darrell Jackson told The Associated Press they believe Clinton is the only Democrat who can win the presidency. Both said they had been courted by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama; Ford said Obama winning the primary would drag down the rest of the party.
................................................................


So whoever offers the most cash gets the endorsement ? I am beginning to understand
what politics is all about.

Does this have anything to do with campaign reform ?

 

[THE KOD]

Supporting Presidential Candidates
May a Delegate or Delegate Committee Make Contributions to Candidates?
A delegate or delegate committee may contribute a maximum of $2,300 to a federal candidate, per election.4 11 CFR 110.1(b)(1). The primary and general are considered separate elections but, in the case of Presidential candidates, the entire primary season is considered only one election. 11 CFR 110.1(j)(1).

Note that a contribution to a candidate must be reported by the candidate's committee. For this reason, when making an in-kind contribution, a delegate or delegate committee should notify the candidate's committee of the monetary value. Note also that in-kind contributions generally count against a publicly funded Presidential candidate's expenditure limits.
..............................................................

I think this is for contributions to the candidates.
I don't think the money was intended to be spent in this manner.

 

[THE KOD]

In 1996 the campaign finance system experienced a catastrophic failure. Laws were bent, if not broken, and stories about White House coffees, Lincoln bedroom sleepovers, and Chinese money filled the headlines through much of 1997. The Federal Election Commission proved ineffective at enforcing campaign finance laws that were themselves in need of an overhaul. Large soft money contributions to the political parties drew particular criticism.

After years of work campaign finance reform advocates achieved a major victory on March 20, 2002 when the Senate passed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA, also known as McCain-Feingold) in a 60 to 40 vote. President Bush quietly signed the measure into law (Public Law No. 107-155) on March 27, 2002; it took effect on November 6, 2002 although its constitutionality was challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court and legal wrangling continued well after the 2004 election. There were concerns that cutting off the flow of soft money to the parties would harm those institutions, but the parties adapted well to the new environment.

One small but noteworthy change brought about by BCRA was to raise the $1,000 limit on individual contributions to $2,000. The $1,000 limit had not been adjusted for inflation since the law was enacted in 1974 and was worth about one-third of the original level.
.................................................................

I am having some trouble finding what the Presidential candidates can buy with their 50 million.

 

[The Sponge]

She don't have a shot. I just saw the swift boat adds they will use last night on Fox. Why fox would go after her but say nothing about Rudy or Mccain is strange for a fair and balance network. I can't understand why they keep doing this. people might not believe they are fair and balanced.:shrug:

 

[THE KOD]

She don't have a shot. I just saw the swift boat adds they will use last night on Fox. Why fox would go after her but say nothing about Rudy or Mccain is strange for a fair and balance network.

..............................................................


If you think that she dont have a shot at this your nuts. If she carrys the woman vote, she is in.

This will be down and dirty. She has the cash and the wherewithall. And she has Bill by the nuts.

 

[THE KOD]

Although critics charge that costly negative or misleading campaign blitzes alienate a weary public from politics and elections, University of Wisconsin political scientist John Coleman believes they do the country some good.
"Studies indicate that campaign spending does not diminish trust, efficacy, and involvement," Mr. Coleman wrote in his own analysis earlier this year. "Spending increases public knowledge of the candidates, across essentially all groups in the population. ... Getting more money into campaigns should, on the whole, be beneficial to American democracy.
.................................................................

getting closer.

trust of our public officials ?

 

[THE KOD]

January 17, 2007

Dear Senator,

Our organizations strongly urge you to vote for the Feingold amendment to close a gaping loophole in the gift rules that allows lobbyists and lobbying organizations to spend large amounts of money to pay for parties at the national conventions to ?honor? a Member or members of Congress.

Under this loophole, if a ban on gifts from lobbyists and lobbying organizations is adopted in the Senate, a lobbyist or lobbying organization would then be prohibited from spending $25 to pay for a Senator?s lunch, but the same lobbyist or lobbying organization would be able to pay $25,000 or $50,000 for a party at the national conventions to ?honor? the same Senator.

The worst abuses of this indefensible loophole occur at the national presidential nominating conventions, where parties for Senators and Representatives are financed by lobbyists and lobbying organizations. Often these parties involve substantial sums of money paid by lobbyists and lobbying organizations for lavish parties to ?honor? a Senator or Representative who chairs a key committee or subcommittee with jurisdiction over the legislative interests of the lobbyists and lobbying organizations footing the bills for the parties.

According to a USA Today article (August 30, 2004) on parties at the national nominating conventions:

The entry fee for participation has gone up dramatically,? says David Rehr, president of the National Beer Wholesalers Association, who is contributing either beer or money to help sponsor nine parties this week. To get top billing as a sponsor for an elaborate event can cost $100,000 or more; lower-level sponsorships are available for $50,000 or $25,000.

There is no way to justify having strict limits on gifts from lobbyists and lobbying organizations to Senators and at the same time allowing these same lobbyists and lobbying organizations to pay tens of thousands of dollars for a party at the national conventions to ?honor? a Senator, that is, in essence, the Senator?s party.
................................................................

 

[THE KOD]

What the holy hell is going on here

 

[THE KOD]

.....................................................

If there is any place I would like to live out my life it would be in South Carolina, with all my friends.

 

[THE KOD]

before you get too involved in Barack Hussein Obama---you might want to question his credibilty-
Wonder how he answers this one---

........................................................

Dogs I would be willing to say that your mind is made up and you will be casting your vote for Hillary in 2008.

not sure why I get this feeling though.

 

[THE KOD]

The endorsements come just days before Obama and Clinton campaign in the state for the first time in the 2008 race.

Jackson and Ford took credit for turning out black voters for Edwards in 2004 in a state where half the primary voters are black. In his only primary victory, Edwards won 37 percent of the vote, slightly better than Sen. John Kerry.

Support from black voters is key in South Carolina, where 49 percent of the Democratic presidential primary vote came from blacks in 2004. The state will host the first Southern primaries for both the GOP and Democrats in 2008.
.........................................................

Uh huh

 

[THE KOD]

DAVENPORT, Iowa - Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday that President Bush should withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq before he leaves office, asserting it would be ?the height of irresponsibility? to pass the war along to the next commander in chief.

?This was his decision to go to war with an ill-conceived plan and an incompetently executed strategy,? the Democratic senator from New York said in her initial presidential campaign swing through Iowa.

?We expect him to extricate our country from this before he leaves office? in January 2009, the former first lady said.
.........................................................

In other words, she has no clue what the fawk to do and does not want the responsiblity for what happens when we do pull out.

Geez Louise.

 

[djv]

I guess we should give the Dems credit. They do look like America. Not just all white guys. If we like it or not we have become many colors and even have woman involved. I know there are many Americans that are bigots and can never live with that.

 

[THE KOD]

Hillary Clinton enjoys several advantages. She has millions in the bank and a topflight team of advisers. She was handily re-elected to a second term in the Senate, winning even the most conservative areas of her adopted home state of New York. And her husband is the Democratic Party?s best campaign strategist and biggest fundraising draw.

But analysts say there are other, significant downsides to a Clinton candidacy.

Despite her centrist six-year Senate voting record, Clinton?s reputation remains deeply rooted in her polarizing eight years as first lady. Skeptics say she may still be too liberal for many voters, who recall her husband?s scandal-plagued presidency and her own audacious effort to reform the nation?s health care system. And no one knows how her status as the first serious female candidate would play out.

?Everyone knows Hillary Clinton can raise the money and that she has a good team, but it?s mitigated by all the mumbling that she?s not electable,? said Joe Trippi, who managed Howard Dean?s upstart 2004 presidential campaign.

In Clinton?s case, so persistent have been the concerns about her prospects for victory in a general election that this summer, two of her top advisers attacked the matter head on.

?We?ve heard all this ?Hillary can?t win? stuff before,?? strategist James Carville and longtime pollster Mark Penn wrote in The Washington Post, referring to Clinton?s first Senate race in New York in 2000. That year, she defeated Republican Rep. Rick Lazio by 12 percentage points.

Women voters to tip scales?

Penn and Carville also argued that Clinton?s popularity with women voters could tip a number of swing states her way. In her landslide re-election victory last month, Clinton won 73 percent of the women?s vote, compared with 61 percent of men?s.
.......................................................