Obama's first 100 days II

119 posts / 0 new
Last post

"Regardless, the man is creating a perfect Weimar-like storm for the rise of fascism in the US."

I hate to tell you, but it has already risen.  We just had eight years of it.


Links please.  Which backers supported Obama over McCain?

[url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article17523... defect to the Obama camp[/color][/url]


I remember some guy named Colin Powell, too.


wage zombie wrote:

Links please.  Which backers supported Obama over McCain?

David Frum (Bush speechwriter), Peggy Noonan (Reagan Speechwriter), Kathleen Parker (Conservative columnist) , David Brooks, Andrew Sullivan... the list goes on, but all of the above are prominent, widely published conservatives who supported the Iraq war, Bush and Obama in 08. they are quite happy with Obama's war policies so far. 


ETA: can't believe I forgot Colin Powell.


Frum, Noonan and Brooks did not support Obama.  Sullivan did.  Parker may have.

wage zombie

Sullivan also endorsed John Kerry.

The first link given by Jingles above, "Republicans defect to the Obama camp" lists a handful of names of Republicans who have grown disillusioned with Bush (one of whom was supporting McCain) and states that "Obama and Clinton have vacuumed up more than $750,000 (£375,000) in individual contributions from former Bush donors."  Ooooh, $750,000 between Obama and Clinton.  Come on, those were Bush's biggest backers?  Now that's a link to an article from May 2007, but that's the link we were given.

The link given to the wiki page makes no mention at all of funding.  Sure lots of Republicans voted for Obama, that's how he won.  And some prominent Republicans noticed that the Bush administration was batshit crazy and McCain would've been the same.  But no mention of funding at all.

I see nothing in these links to justify the claim that "Bush's biggest backers all supported Obama over Mcain."


If AIG contributed to Obama's campaign I'd hope that gets some traction in the blogosphere at least.


wage zombie


The top ten recipients of AIG donations for the 2008 election cycle:
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut: $103,100
President Barack Obama: $101,332
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona: $59,499
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: $35,965
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana: $24,750
Former presidential candidate Mitt Romney: $20,850
Vice President Joe Biden: $19,975
Rep. John Larson, D-Connecticut: $19,750
Sen. John Sununu, R-New Hampshire: $18,500
FormerpPresidential candidate Rudy Giuliani: $13,200

So did AIG sponsor a particular candidate or a particular party or were they just putting money into everyone?  Have there been any presidents lately who have NOT gotten large contributions from AIG?

The Obama campaign raised $650 million.  So the AIG donations represent 0.015% of Obama's total, that's 1.5% of 1%.  I'm all for criticizing Obama's actions as president--if people want to make a stink about his donations i would hope they could find something more damning than this.

St. Paul's Prog...

Good point.  Most of Obama's contributions were from the grassroots, from small contributors.  It is unfair to say he is "beholden" to corporate America.

wage zombie

Wellll...i don't think i'd go that far.  I think to some extent any USian president will be beholden to corporate America.  I just don't think he's beholden to "Bush's biggest backers" and i think a $100,000 AIG donation isn't much of a scandal.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture


My brother suggested keeping a list of positive “Changes” coming out of the Obama Administration. I'm into credit where due, so I started one. Granted it’s only been two months, but the list is rather short: a seeming retreat from the insane anti-medical cannabis government position that saw DEA agents raiding California dispensaries and depriving sick people of their medicine; trials, at least, for Gitmo prisoners; suspending (but not killing) funding for Yucca Mountain; allowing Stem Cell research and…not much else. When one adds in the critical non-changes at Defense and the Treasury, the picture is very bleak, indeed.

[url=http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly03242009.html][color=mediumblue][u]O...'s Team of Losers[/u][/color][/url]


The Obama administration on Thursday detailed its wide-ranging plan to overhaul financial regulation by subjecting hedge funds and traders of exotic financial instruments, now among the biggest and most freewheeling players on Wall Street, to potentially strict new government supervision.



[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR200903... Another Bush policy Obama is keeping [/url]:


Civil liberties advocates are accusing the Obama administration of forsaking campaign rhetoric and adopting the same expansive arguments that his predecessor used to cloak some of the most sensitive intelligence-gathering programs of the Bush White House.

The first signs have come just weeks into the new administration, in a case filed by an Oregon charity suspected of funding terrorism. President Obama's Justice Department not only sought to dismiss the lawsuit by arguing that it implicated "state secrets," but also escalated the standoff -- proposing that government lawyers might take classified documents from the court's custody to keep the charity's representatives from reviewing them.

The suit by the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation has proceeded further than any other in challenging the use of warrantless wiretaps, threatening to expose the inner workings of that program. It is the second time the new Justice Department has followed its predecessors in claiming the state-secrets privilege, which would allow the government to exclude evidence in a civil case on grounds that it jeopardizes national security.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

[url=http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2009/03/war-on-terror-20/][color=mediumblu... on Terror 2.0[/u][/color][/url]


Defending government eavesdropping without a warrant. Arguing that prisoners of the U.S. held overseas don't have the right to challenge their detention in U.S. courts. Claiming that victims of CIA kidnapping shouldn't have their cases heard because of "national security" interests.

[b]These were supposed to be relics of the Bush administration[/b] and its attacks on basic constitutional and human rights. Instead, they are among the many troubling actions taken by the new administration of President Barack Obama.

Rather than repudiating Bush's shredding of the Constitution, the new White House is embracing some of the worst abuses carried out by the Bush administration in the name of national security and the "war on terror...."

[b]Among other things, since taking office, the Obama administration has: pre-empted a Supreme Court ruling on whether a legal resident on U.S. soil can be imprisoned indefinitely without trial as an "enemy combatant"; attempted to block a judicial ruling on Bush's warrantless wiretapping program; asserted in court that prisoners currently held overseas by U.S. forces in Bagram, Afghanistan, have no constitutional right to challenge their detentions in U.S. courts; and argued to dismiss cases brought in federal court by alleged victims of CIA kidnappings and torture on the grounds of "national security."[/b]

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

[url=http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/2009/03/29/fashion-statement/][color=... if there were true transparency in government?[/u][/color][/url]

wage zombie

Yeah, if there were transparency in gov't then AIG would get a patch on Obama's suit for funding 1.5% of 1% of Obama's campaign.  That's a stretch.

ceti ceti's picture

Political theatre it is. Obama has demonstrated his absolute fealty to his puppet masters. It's amazing really, as he is day by day providing incredible fodder to the conspiracy nuts out there.

We in Canada seem almost like a two-bit colony in retrospect, whipped by MEDIAted conservative reaction to disorient and disorganize the population.

wage zombie

I think they only let puppets be president.  The question is then how much can subversive puppets accomplish. 


Long thread.


Topic locked