Obama Supporters Getting Perks

[Lynco Cards]

People should not be able to buy positions in government.

I say you have to do what it takes to get ahead these days. If our government is doing it i say let's all do it. It goes on everyday in life whether anyone likes it or not. Its just become a way of life and its here to stay.

[habsheaven]

I'm not sure what the problem is here.

Are we saying that these Obama bundlers (68 of 350 = 19%) should be automatically EXCLUDED? What does the 81% not getting the perks say about the situation?

Do we honestly expect that these Obama bundlers (250 of 350) would NOT be the ones invited to WH events? What % is the 250 of the total number of invitees to the WH?

The last one is the best, Obama bundlers (30 of 350 = 8%) with "ties" to companies that have or "hope to" conduct business with the government.

Again, are we to expect contributors to political campaigns to be AUTOMATICALLY EXCLUDED from doing business with the WH?

Let's try and get real for once.

[AUTaxMan]

As long as it is not illegal I do not have any isssues with this. It happens all the time and we all do it all the time. We hook up friends because we know them, we give them discounts if we can, we give them free itmes. It happens all the time and I do not see anything wrong with it. It's who you know.

Yeah, but you don't give your friends perks with my money.

[duane1969]

As long as it is not illegal I do not have any isssues with this. It happens all the time and we all do it all the time. We hook up friends because we know them, we give them discounts if we can, we give them free itmes. It happens all the time and I do not see anything wrong with it. It's who you know.

Do you "hook up" your friends because they gave you money? This isn't nepotism or cronyism. It is buying political influence.

[duane1969]

I'm not sure what the problem is here.

Are we saying that these Obama bundlers (68 of 350 = 19%) should be automatically EXCLUDED? What does the 81% not getting the perks say about the situation?

Do we honestly expect that these Obama bundlers (250 of 350) would NOT be the ones invited to WH events? What % is the 250 of the total number of invitees to the WH?

The last one is the best, Obama bundlers (30 of 350 = 8%) with "ties" to companies that have or "hope to" conduct business with the government.

Again, are we to expect contributors to political campaigns to be AUTOMATICALLY EXCLUDED from doing business with the WH?

Let's try and get real for once.

As far as i am concerned 1% is too much. If someone wants to donate to a campaign then I am fine with that. If their donation is secured with the promise of a position or special treatment then I take issue with it.

[habsheaven]

As far as i am concerned 1% is too much. If someone wants to donate to a campaign then I am fine with that. If their donation is secured with the promise of a position or special treatment then I take issue with it.

I missed the evidence of this in the report. Can you point that out to me?

[AUTaxMan]

I missed the evidence of this in the report. Can you point that out to me?

The pattern of behavior is evidence. It may not be irrefutable proof, but it is evidence.

[duane1969]

I missed the evidence of this in the report. Can you point that out to me?

It was in the first two paragraphs of the CPI report. Pretty hard to miss.

As President Barack Obama ramps up his campaign for a second term, many of his top fundraisers are showing how money helps win influence and access to power in Washington.

Dozens of Obama’s elite donors — many of them wealthy business figures — have been appointed to advisory panels and commissions that can play a role in setting government policy. Others have been invited to a range of exclusive White House briefings, holiday parties and splashy social events.

[habsheaven]

It was in the first two paragraphs of the CPI report. Pretty hard to miss.

I said EVIDENCE. My initial post points out QUITE CLEARLY how the report skews the numbers. You guys are unbelievable.

[Lynco Cards]

I say Obama did nothing wrong here nor did the people who gave money. People who donate get something in return and it should be that way.