Obama - first Presidential candidate not backed by Big Oil

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by frenchperson, Sep 20, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-crisis-that-could-make-the-us-election-a-cleaner-contest-935307.html

    The above is a link to an excellent article by Johann Hari of The Independent. John McCain is pretending to be greener and cleaner and 'completely opposed' to the lassez-faire regulation that gave us the 2008 crash. But he's also queuing up to take the Big Oil cash to fund and fight his campaign and calling for tighter rules, as though he's been asking for this all along. Whereas Obama has been opposed to it, but takes small individual donations and is becoming eclipsed as a result.

    McCain is partly to blame for this fiasco, having backed Bush's every move to give greater scope for greed on the markets - and will do so again in the future, if allowed the opportunity.
  2. fark me. You're back!

    Where have you been FP? :?
  3. He won't make it into the White House then,will he?Remember 2000?...
  4. I'm not a McCain for president supporter but the author seems to take every opportunity to paint McCain in a negative light and ignore or hide some basic facts. The truth is McCain was a reformer far longer than the 'brief' period the journalist claims.

    McCain was also investigated and cleared over the Keating scandal, pushed for campaign reform along with some key democrats when it meant going against his own Republican party (and arguably doing so cost him the 2000 presidential nomination).

    The author also fails to mention that the de-regulation took place under Clinton and had wide support from both parties.
  5. The operative word in this case has been highlighted. I used to be a big fan of the guy up until the point he decided that being a maverick wasn't going to get him the GOP nomination and he started climbing into bed with The Usual Suspects.

    Johan Hari is a little prick.
  6. The Crash of 08.
    To my simple way of thinking, George II and Blur the bad, kept interest rates low, too low for too long.
    The man in the street though he cold afford more debt then was prudent during the times of unpopular wars, for which neither had chosen to raise Taxes which would normally have been required to pay for said wars.
    The economy Normally decides the election so George bought one and Dear Leader Bought two.
  7. Nor did I see mention that Obama is only second to Sen Dodd in receiving money from Fannie and Freddie...the funny thing is that the the totals are for the last 20 years and Obama has only been in the senate a little over 3 years.


    May not want to take money from big oil but sure likes taking money from a quasi govt. company that was run by a bunch of democrat worshipping cunts that is in the process of saddling US taxpayers with a huge debt.
  8. South America.
  9. That's Specious with a capital "S". Such a backer is eclipsed rather by big oil.
  10. One big problem with this assertion- these figures represent primarily individual contributions. Remember that Obama has over 2 million Americans on his donor list. Unless you can demonstrate that bundling has been going on or that, like the oil companies, employees have been given 'bonuses' to donate to a campaign, I'd suggest that there's scant evidence here of some sort of influence peddling.
  11. Oh really and the fact that he has/had Raines and Johnson working in and around his campaign is just a coincidence as well.

    He's a Chi-town political thug, and his only qualification is that he's black.
  12. A smug little f**ker and no mistake guvnor.
  13. Wait let me guess, you've been helping the locals deal with all the pain and suffering inflicted on them by the 'empire' up north. :roll:
  14. Thanks for your contributions. It's so refreshing to be treated to a detailed, in-depth analysis and a painstaking, forensic, point by point rebuttal of the argument.

    It's a close-run thing, but on this occasion I'll stick with Hari.