One year out from the next election, the President’s 2012 reelection coffers are failing to fill up at a fast enough rate to meet the quarterly bilking quota.  Thus the situation demands a new tactic to prod, embarrass and shame former contributors into making the same mistake they made last time by sending money to reelect a man who, if truth be told, most people wish would retire.

One thing Obama has never had a problem doing was finding a way to guilt people out of money.  In fact, money grubbing appears to be the President’s singular forte.

With that in mind, the Obama reelection campaign has come up with a way to mortify people into contributing – sending emails that threaten to expose traitorous former patrons to neighborhood drones who remain faithful.

Initially, the Obama 2012 fundraising effort commenced with a $5 Dinner with Barack raffle. After that idea failed to sell, the concept morphed into a “fired-up” first lady cheerleading supporters into coughing up cash by hawking raffle tickets for the discounted price of $3.

Apparently, that creative tactic hasn’t worked either, because America’s socialist-leaning anti-capitalist president is now hoping to finance his reelection by injecting a perverse form of — dare I say, competition — into the fundraising effort by “ever-so-gently sham[ing] supporters into donating.”

Even if the effort ends up failing, the concept is a good one, because the method could have an effect on baby boomers who grew up way before being first in a competition was considered mean-spirited and guilt and humiliation still held sway over the insecure.

(more…)

From The Hill:

Democratic leaders in the House and Senate criticizing GOP groups for allegedly funneling foreign money into campaign ads have seen their party raise more than $1 million from political action committees affiliated with foreign companies.

House and Senate Democrats have received approximately $1.02 million this cycle from such PACs, according to an analysis compiled for The Hill by the Center for Responsive Politics. House and Senate GOP leaders have taken almost $510,000 from PACs on the same list.

The PACS are funded entirely by contributions from U.S. employees of subsidiaries of foreign companies. All of the contributions are made public under Federal Elections Commission rules, and the PACs affiliated with the subsidiaries of foreign corporations are governed by the same rules that American firms’ PACs or other PACs would face.

(more…)

Has the White House been influenced by a convicted domestic terrorist for its attack on the Chamber of Commerce?

The latest assault on the Chamber has been spear-headed by none other than the President himself and picked up by David Axelrod, MoveOn.org and all the usual Astro-Turfers who receive marching orders from the DNC.  It’s become part of the standard talking points for cable-news pundits and their well-programmed guests and has been the new rallying cry for the left as they try their best to explain the imminent electoral disaster that looms on November 2^nd.

But one group was well ahead of the curve on this movement to stop the Chamber of Commerce.  In fact, they even own the URL “StopTheChamber.com”.  That group is the infamous Velvet Revolution headed by convicted violent criminal and bomber, Brett Kimberlin.  In her extensive and detailed article on Kimberlin and his past violent crimes, Liberty Chick noted that left-wing blogs and main stream media organs routinely site Kimberlin and his partner, Brad Friedman as legitimate sources and as normative “watch-dogs” over-seeing right-wing election shenanigans.  The problem is, Kimberlin is a convicted domestic terrorist who has been described as a habitual liar by those who have looked into his past.

And yet, the mainstream Democrats clinging to any strategy to stop the bleeding over the next two weeks are latching on to the Stop the Chamber narrative that was first hatched at Kimberlin’s Velvet Revolution site last year.

(more…)

Let’s go back to those hopey-changie days of the Obama campaign for president when he railed constantly against all those “special interests” and evil lobbyists that he claimed were ruining the political process. Let us recall that once elected he claimed he’d have the “strictest ethics rules” of any president ever.

Obama has made sure that his message has been anti-special interests, anti-lobbyists, anti-business-as-usual… heck just plain anti-business, for that matter. It’s all been quite a show. Unfortunately for all the talk his actions speak to the opposite of his spin — more on that in a moment. But even if President Obama was serious about his anti-lobbyist rhetoric his party has utterly ignored him on the issue.

A recent Bloomberg report reveals that lobbyists have raised $1.5 million for Democrat campaign funds during the first six months of the Obama regime despite Obama’s constant anti-lobbyist refrain. That is far more than the GOP has been able to raise.

As much as Obama rails against the influence held by lobbyists in Washington, candidates rely on them to help fund increasingly expensive campaigns. Reports released today show lobbyists also personally contributed to Democrats including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Bloomberg reports that just two campaign donation “bundlers” have brought in a combined $860,700 into the coffers of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee since Obama took office. The most successful fundraiser, former Pelosi operative Ryan Rudominer, brought in $716,300 from the electric energy lobby while the second highest fundraiser was Tony Podesta. Podesta represents BP oil, among others and brought in $144,400.

Apparently the party at which Obama sits as headman isn’t paying much mind to the boss’ entreaties. More likely, they all know it’s just hokum and hopey-changie jaw-jaw and not really meant to be taken seriously.

(more…)

From today’s San Francisco Chronicle:

Despite record high membership and dues, and years of unparalleled clout in state capitols, public-sector unions find themselves on the defensive, desperately trying to hold onto past gains in the face of a skeptical press and angry voters. So far has the zeitgeist shifted against them that on one recent weekend, government employees were the butt of a “Saturday Night Live” skit, and the next day, a New York Times Magazine cover article proclaimed “The Teachers’ Unions’ Last Stand.”

Public unions’ traditional strength – the ability to finance their members’ rising pay and benefits through tax increases – has become a liability. Although private-sector unions always have had to worry that consumers will resist rising prices for their goods, public sector unions have benefited from the fact that taxpayers can’t choose – they are, in effect, “captive consumers.”

At some point, however, voters turn resentful as they sense that:

– They are underwriting, through their taxes, a level of salary and benefits for government employment that is better than what they and their families have.

– Government services, from schools to the Department of Motor Vehicles, are not good enough – not for the citizen individually nor the public generally – to justify the high and escalating cost.

We are at that point.

(more…)

Give and you shall receive is the moral of the day coming out of Washington, DC.  Organized labor, principally the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and Service Employees International Union (SEIU) are poised to spend at least $100 million on an “incumbent protection program,” according to The Hill.

This $100 million figure does not account for the AFL-CIO, which didn’t release its budgeted amount for political spending, or the two teachers’ unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, so it’s likely that figure is grossly underestimated.  Undoubtedly, progressive candidates are giddy for their piece of the Big Labor action.

The unions have a lot to defend.  Their agenda, pushed at break-neck speed by the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress, has upset a significant number of American voters and it’s going to cost a lot to defend.  Consider what this Obama water carrier said:

“We have got to protect the incumbency in the House. We have got to protect the incumbency in the Senate,” [AFSCME president Gerry] McEntee said. “It is going to be hard. Those tea-baggers are out there. There is an anti-incumbency mood out there.”

After the top tier, there will be a second tier of House candidates AFSCME will be monitoring and will step in to help defend if they become endangered by GOP challengers.

“We are not out there looking for new seats. We have our hands full the way it is,” said McEntee, who has been a key voice in pushing labor to play an active role in Democratic primaries across the nation.

You better order extra ink for your check printer, Ger.  America’s pretty mad at your shills in Congress.

(more…)

From The Hill:

The world’s top-earning hedge fund managers have bankrolled almost exclusively Democratic campaigns.

The top 10 highest-paid hedge fund managers in 2009 have dished out campaign contributions almost only to Democrats. 

Over their lifetimes, those managers have given almost $33 million in campaign contributions to Democrats, according to research by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and that is based on data maintained by the nonpartisan CQMoneyline.

The same managers gave roughly $600,000 to Republicans, according to the research. The contributions went 98 percent to Democrats and two percent to Republicans.
(more…)

Welcome, Goldman Sachs, to the growing list of people and companies that have been attacked and demonized by the fickle, Obama Administration to score political points.   You certainly did not want to land in the position (no one does), but, nevertheless, here you are, excoriated in the press and at the center of a political feeding frenzy.

Time to take a deep breath, calmly assess the situation, and plan your next moves.  Your cause is not lost, and you have enormous resources, that could be used as effective weapons should you choose to use them.

First, you have to be honest with yourself and understand that you made some huge mistakes over the past few months.  For whatever reason, the Obama Administration singled you out to be the political piñata and now hopes that, by repeated whacks in public, you will produce the political candy that will get Dems re-elected.

Here, too, you should understand that the Democratic leadership carefully picks its victims.  There are many potential villains, but only the most vulnerable are ever singled out for destruction.   The political hyenas took your full measure and singled you out from the pack of other financial institutions because you looked least likely to put up a strong defense.

Maybe you went to one too many silly photo ops at the White House; maybe you attended too many mindless campaign events; maybe your statements were too timid.  But, you made one, or more, of these particular mistakes, and, as a result, the predators are circling, hoping to skin you alive and mount your hide atop the Capitol.

(more…)