March 13, 2012
By Steve Watson
“We should all be suspicious about the caucus results. Ron Paul wins almost every on-line poll and straw poll, (not to mention getting way more people showing up at his events than all of the other candidates) yet he keeps losing caucuses? Something just doesn’t seem right.” –KTRN
In a conversation with reporters in Missouri this weekend, GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul said that he and his supporters were suspicious about the outcomes of several caucuses because the crowds and volumes of support have been much bigger for him than for any other candidate.
“Quite frankly I don’t think the other candidates get crowds like this, and we get them constantly” Paul said, after he had spoken to yet another crowd of over 2500 supporters in Missouri.
“You would get the perception that we would be getting a lot more votes.” He added.
“Sometimes we get thousands of people like this and we’ll take them to the polling booth, yet we won’t win the caucus.” Paul said, adding “A lot of our supporters are very suspicious about it.”
When informed that Santorum had won the Kansas caucuses, Paul admitted that he had not seen the numbers on it at that point but again reiterated his point, stating:
“That reminds me of a picture I just looked at. I had four thousand people and he had a hundred and fifty. So who knows.”
The picture, below, shows a huge turn out at a Kansas town hall meeting for Paul this weekend, compared to virtually nobody showing at Santorum’s event.
February 14, 2012
By Eric W. Dolan
Republican presidential candidates Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, and Newt Gingrich have all told the group Morality in Media that they would enforce federal obscenity laws that prohibit the distribution of pornography.
Those laws, the anti-pornography group said, are being ignored by the current administration.
“Federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced,” Santorum told the group. “If elected President, I will appoint an Attorney General who will do so.”
Romney told the group it was “imperative that we cultivate the promotion of fundamental family values.”
“This can be accomplished with increased parental involvement and enhanced supervision of our children,” he said in a statement.
“It includes strict enforcement of our nation’s obscenity laws, as well as the promotion of parental software controls that guard our children from Internet pornography.”
Gingrich also said he would appoint an Attorney General who would enforce federal obscenity laws.
Santorum and Gingrich previously signed a pledge by the conservative Christian group The Family Leader in which they vowed to protect women and children from “seduction into promiscuity and all forms of pornography.” But Romney refused to sign, saying the pledge was “undignified and inappropriate for a presidential campaign.”
January 30, 2012
By Pat Garofalo
“Why would anyone even consider voting for Mitt Romney?” –KTRN
Mitt Romney has been leading the way in the 2012 presidential race when it comes to donations from Wall Street, pulling in millions from the financial sector since he launched his campaign. And the industry’s favor for Romney comes across even more when looking at just the five biggest banks in the U.S.: JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs
In fact, as McClatchy News noted, Romney has received more in donations from employees of the nation’s five biggest banks than all of the other presidential candidates combined:
Employees at the five largest U.S. banks by assets, including Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co., had given Romney about $600,000 through the first three quarters of 2011, according to the most recent filings available from the Federal Election Commission.
January 30, 2012
By Lee Drutman
“It’s always about the money and the Political One Perfect has most of it.” –KTRN
If you think wealth is concentrated in the United States, just wait till you look at the data on campaign spending.
In the 2010 election cycle, 26,783 individuals (or slightly less than one in ten thousand Americans) each contributed more than $10,000 to federal political campaigns. Combined, these donors spent $774 million. That’s 24.3% of the total from individuals to politicians, parties, PACs, and independent expenditure groups. Together, they would fill only two-thirds of the 41,222 seats at Nationals Park the baseball field two miles from the U.S. Capitol. When it comes to politics, they are The One Percent of the One Percent.
A Sunlight Foundation examination of data from the Federal Election Commission and the Center for Responsive Politics reveals a growing dependence of candidates and political parties on the One Percent of the One Percent, resulting in a political system that could be disproportionately influenced by donors in a handful of wealthy enclaves. Our examination also shows that some of the heaviest hitters in the 2010 cycle were ideological givers, suggesting that the influence of the One Percent of the One Percent on federal elections may be one of the obstacles to compromise in Washington.
The One Percent of the One Percent are not average Americans. Overwhelmingly, they are corporate executives, investors, lobbyists, and lawyers. A good number appear to be highly ideological. They give to multiple candidates and to parties and independent issue groups. They tend to cluster in a limited number of metropolitan zip codes, especially in New York, Washington, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
In the 2010 election cycle, the average One Percent of One Percenter spent $28,913, more than the median individual income of $26,364
At the top of this elite group are individuals such as Bob Perry, CEO of Perry Homes, who gave $7.3 million to Karl Rove’s American Crossroads in 2010 and $4.4 million to Swift Vets and POWs for Truth in 2004, and Wayne Hughes, owner and chairman of Public Storage Inc., who gave $3.25 million to American Crossroads in 2010, and Fred Eshelman, CEO of Pharmaceutical Product Development who spent $3 million in 2010 on his own group, RightChange. Sunlight’s Ryan Sibley writes more about the top donors here.
Unlike the other 99.99% of Americans who do not make these contributions, these elite donors have unique access. In a world of increasingly expensive campaigns, The One Percent of the One Percent effectively play the role of political gatekeepers. Prospective candidates need to be able to tap into these networks if they want to be taken seriously. And party leaders on both sides are keenly aware that more than 80% of party committee money now comes from these elite donors.
Political scientists Wendy K. Tam Cho and James G. Gimpel have called these elite donor networks “campaign gold” after discovering just how much big contributors tend to flock together, making it easy for candidates to raise substantial sums of money at a single event.
Will Kevin Trudeau Run For United States Congress? How To Fix America (What Newt, Mitt, & Obama wont tell you)
Kevin Trudeau is back, and he’s back with a vengeance!
Kevin outlines the beginning steps of How To Fix America. This is the information they are not telling you. You will not hear this discussed by Newt, Mitt, Obama, Trump, or any other pundits or politicians.
If you want to know How To fix America, you must watch this video.
Our liberties and freedoms are being taken away! Trudeau divulges what is wrong with America, and what YOU can do set it back on the right track!
Today is the day you have all been waiting for…KT is back, and he’s back with a vengeance! Our liberties and freedoms are being taken away! Trudeau divulges what is wrong with America, and what YOU can do set it back on the right track!
Become An Insider!
Kevin is on YouTube!
Download Kevin’s iPhone App!
Sign Up For Kevin’s FREE Podcast
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Become Kevin’s Friend on Facebook
Kevin’s Film Club
Kevin’s Book Club
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
November 29th, 2010
By: Juan A. Lozano
Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay – once one of the most powerful and feared Republicans in Congress — was convicted Wednesday on charges he illegally funneled corporate money to Texas candidates in 2002.
Jurors deliberated for 19 hours before returning guilty verdicts against DeLay on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. He faces up to life in prison on the money laundering charge.
After the verdicts were read, DeLay hugged his daughter, Danielle, and his wife, Christine. There was no immediate comment from him or his attorneys.
Prosecutors said DeLay, who once held the No. 2 job in the House of Representatives and whose heavy-handed style earned him the nickname “the Hammer,” used his political action committee to illegally channel $190,000 in corporate donations into 2002 Texas legislative races through a money swap.
DeLay and his attorneys maintained the former Houston-area congressman did nothing wrong as no corporate funds went to Texas candidates and the money swap was legal.
The verdict came after a three-week trial in which prosecutors presented more than 30 witnesses and volumes of e-mails and other documents. DeLay’s attorneys presented five witnesses.
Prosecutors said DeLay conspired with two associates, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis, to use his Texas-based PAC to send $190,000 in corporate money to an arm of the Washington-based Republican National Committee, or RNC. The RNC then sent the same amount to seven Texas House candidates. Under Texas law, corporate money can’t go directly to political campaigns.
Prosecutors claim the money helped Republicans take control of the Texas House. That enabled the GOP majority to push through a Delay-engineered congressional redistricting plan that sent more Texas Republicans to Congress in 2004 – and strengthened DeLay’s political power.
DeLay’s attorneys argued the money swap resulted in the seven candidates getting donations from individuals, which they could legally use in Texas.
They also said DeLay only lent his name to the PAC and had little involvement in how it was run. Prosecutors, who presented mostly circumstantial evidence, didn’t prove he committed a crime, they said.
DeLay has chosen to have Senior Judge Pat Priest sentence him. He faces five years to life in prison on the money laundering charge and two to 20 years on the conspiracy charge. He also would be eligible for probation.
The 2005 criminal charges in Texas, as well as a separate federal investigation of DeLay’s ties to disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, ended his 22-year political career representing suburban Houston. The Justice Department probe into DeLay’s ties to Abramoff ended without any charges filed against DeLay.
Ellis and Colyandro, who face lesser charges, will be tried later.
Except for a 2009 appearance on ABC’s hit television show “Dancing With the Stars,” DeLay has been out of the spotlight since resigning from Congress in 2006. He now runs a consulting firm based in the Houston suburb of Sugar Land.
September 21, 2010
By: Amy Gardner
Fresh off big primary wins in Delaware and Alaska, national “tea party” groups are redirecting the energy of the movement toward the November midterm elections, raising millions of dollars, expanding their advocacy into dozens of congressional races and building voter turnout operations nationwide.
Leaders of the Atlanta-based Tea Party Patriots announced a $1 million donation Tuesday, from an anonymous single contributor, that the organization will pour into local tea party groups and get-out-the-vote efforts in some of the most competitive congressional races.
FreedomWorks, which is headquartered in Washington and endorsed 25 House and Senate candidates during the primary season, said it will expand that list to more than 80. The Tea Party Express, based in Sacramento, is planning its largest national bus tour at the end of October to get conservatives to the polls.
The goal is to keep alive the momentum the movement has generated and to use it to target vulnerable Democratic candidates.
“People are starting to realize that the tea party represents a powerful get-out-the-vote machine,” said Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks. “We’ve got the most energized voting constituency in the country. This movement has been organizing since before April 2009, and all of that community is energizing and driving public opinion. The establishment is taking us more seriously. There’s nothing like turning out votes in an election that matters.”
The new push illustratesthe movement’s transformation since the primaries from a disorganized coalition of fiscally conservative activists to a measurable political force. But the tea party’s rapid growth – along with the influx of cash and political professionals – has led some followers to worry that it risks losing its rebel spirit.
“Many of the grass-roots activists who started this movement 18 months ago, myself included, may look and ask the question ‘Dude, where’s my movement?’ ” said Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, which held the movement’s first large-scale convention this spring. (Another scheduled to be held in Nevada next month has been cancelled.) “There is no question the movement has changed. The evolution of ‘Big Tea’ is the logical result of where this movement must go.”
Equally uncertain is whether the movement’s success with activist primary voters will play as well with the broader general electorate in November. Most polls show that at least as many registered voters view the tea party unfavorably as favorably.
Perhaps no group is more aware of the divisions within the movement than FreedomWorks, a tea party organizer headed by Richard K. Armey, a former corporate lobbyist and congressman from Texas who was once House majority leader. FreedomWorks has taken a politically pragmatic approach in deciding which candidates to endorse. In last week’s Senate primary in Delaware, Tea Party Express spent more than $200,000 on behalf of Christine O’Donnell, who was challenging Rep. Michael N. Castle, the establishment GOP choice. But FreedomWorks’ leaders declined to back O’Donnell because they didn’t think she could win the general election in November.
Yet FreedomWorks, which focuses primarily on training volunteers and helping them organize phone banks, door-knocking campaigns and other voting-related efforts, is eager to take advantage of the momentum from O’Donnell’s victory – and also from that of Joe Miller, who beat incumbent Lisa Murkowksi in Alaska’s Republican Senate primary last month. FreedomWorks endorsed O’Donnell the day after her win, and, this week, the group plans to announce that it will back the Senate campaigns of Linda McMahon in Connecticut, Carly Fiorina in California and John Raese in West Virginia.
FreedomWorks and other tea party groups are expanding their lists of approved candidates to include more establishment-backed Republicans. The intention is to rally tea party activists behind all Republicans this fall and not just those who identify with the movement.
“We’ve gone through the primary process,” Kibbe said. “I think the tea party has had a tremendous impact on the quality of the candidates coming out of the primaries. But here we are in the race to November 2, and November 2 is all about holding Democrats accountable.”
Amy Kremer, chairman of the Tea Party Express, distanced her organization from that general-election strategy, noting that the group identified its “heroes” and “targets” on April 15 – and that it is not wavering from the list.
“There may be some groups that need to reevaluate where they are, but we’re not doing that,” she said. “We’ve helped Joe Miller in Alaska and Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O’Donnell in Delaware come across the victory lines, and we’re behind them 100 percent going into November.”
Both national political parties are struggling to adjust to the tea party’s continued prominence. Eric Schultz, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said the party welcomes the nomination of tea-party-backed candidates in Senate races nationwide. He noted that in most of the states holding those elections, notably Kentucky, Nevada and Delaware, those candidates have helped Democrats remain competitive in races in which they were expected to struggle.
“We are more competitive in these races because they nominated candidates who are extremists,” Schultz said.
Still, Democrats must contend with perhaps the biggest strength of the tea party movement, which is its ability to get conservatives to vote. GOP leaders have bristled at the tea party’s willingness to overthrow establishment candidates, but no one doubts the boost that the movement will give Republicans in November.
“That’s not a bad trade-off, considering that we have this tremendous energy and enthusiasm moving into the fall,” said Brian Walsh, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “I would take any one of our candidates over a candidate on the Democratic side who voted for the stimulus bill, who voted for the health-care bill, and whose message is ‘If you vote for me, I’m going to vote for the status quo in Washington.’ ”