By Jim Messina, Campaign Manager on February 6, 2012
In 2010, the Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United case opened the door to a new wave of so-called Super PACs—non-candidate political committees that can receive and spend unlimited money from special interests. For the first time, these committees could accept money from corporations, not just wealthy individuals.
The decision has accelerated a dangerous trend toward a political system increasingly dominated by big-money interests with disproportionate power to spend freely to influence our elections and our government.
It's a trend the President has fought against, coming into office with a mission to limit special-interest influence in Washington. He put in place the most sweeping ethics reforms in history to close the revolving door between government and lobbyists. And he's overseen the most open administration ever—reversing Bush-era policies designed to limit Freedom of Information Act requests and disclosing White House visitor records so that Americans can see how their government works.
The President opposed the Citizens United decision. He understood that with the dramatic growth in opportunities to raise and spend unlimited special-interest money, we would see new strategies to hide it from public view. He continues to support a law to force full disclosure of all funding intended to influence our elections, a reform that was blocked in 2010 by a unanimous Republican filibuster in the U.S. Senate. And the President favors action—by constitutional amendment, if necessary—to place reasonable limits on all such spending.
But this cycle, our campaign has to face the reality of the law as it currently stands.
Over the last few months, Super PACs affiliated with Republican presidential candidates have spent more than $40 million on television and radio, almost all of it for negative ads.
Last week, filings showed that the Super PAC affiliated with Mitt Romney's campaign raised $30 million in 2011 from fewer than 200 contributors, most of them from the financial sector. Governor Romney personally helped raise money for this group, which is run by some of his closest allies.
Meanwhile, other Super PACs established for the sole purpose of defeating the President—along with "nonprofits" that also aren't required to disclose the sources of their funding—have raised more than $50 million. In the aggregate, these groups are expected to spend half a billion dollars, above and beyond what the Republican nominee and party are expected to commit to try to defeat the President.
With so much at stake, we can't allow for two sets of rules in this election whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary of unlimited spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm.
Therefore, the campaign has decided to do what we can, consistent with the law, to support Priorities USA in its effort to counter the weight of the GOP Super PAC. We will do so only in the knowledge and with the expectation that all of its donations will be fully disclosed as required by law to the Federal Election Commission.
What this change means practically: Senior campaign officials as well as some White House and Cabinet officials will attend and speak at Priorities USA fundraising events. While campaign officials may be appearing at events to amplify our message, these folks won't be soliciting contributions for Priorities USA. I should also note that the President, Vice President, and First Lady will not be a part of this effort; their political activity will remain focused on the President's campaign.
But here's what this doesn't change: the fact that ordinary people stepping up to take control of the political process is essential to our strategy.
This decision will help fill a hole on our side. But it's only one part of the overall effort.
Supporting Priorities USA means that our side will not concede the battles on the air in the months to come, but we continue to believe that this election will be won on the ground. Super PACs haven't opened offices. They haven't hired organizers. They haven't registered voters. They haven't knocked on doors or made the kind of personal contact with voters that we know is the single most effective way to persuade people and turn them out on Election Day.
And this is where we have the advantage. It will be up to us—the grassroots organization, funded by an average donation of $55—to win this election.
It's a point of pride that 98 percent of all our donations are $250 or less. Mitt Romney won't reveal that number about his own campaign, but filings show that just 9 percent of the Romney campaign's money in the fourth quarter of last year came from people giving less than $200.
Americans across the country are supporting the most extensive neighbor-to-neighbor, grassroots organization in history.
It's my hope that by making this decision and doing what we can to neutralize the onslaught of special-interest money, we can ensure that the decisive factor in this election won't be an unprecedented flood of special-interest spending, and the outcome will be back in the hands of ordinary Americans.
Secretive oil billionaire brothers pledge $100million war chest to oust Obama from White House
Brotherly ambition: David (left) and Charles Koch (right) are rallying America's most powerful businesspeople to donate $100million to oust Barack Obama from the White House
- David and Charles Koch worth a combined $50billion
- Tea Party founders joined by 300 of America's most rich and powerful
- Obama returns $200k from casino owner facing drug and fraud charges
By Lee Moran Last updated at 4:00 PM on 7th February 2012
Republican supporters led by secretive oil billionaires the Koch brothers have pledged to oust Barack Obama from power - by stumping up a $100million (£63million) war-chest.
David and Charles Koch, worth a combined $50billion, have been joined by 300 of America's wealthiest businessmen in promising the cash to stop Obama from being re-elected.
They met at the conservative brothers' annual three-day Californian retreat, where they gain pledges for non-profit groups that share their libertarian world view.
But it is believed this is the first time the get-together has zoomed in one sole issue.
Sources said an 'alpha-male' mentality of beating Obama at this year's election at all costs soon took over amongst the visitors.
While they are supposed to be neutral, the committees usually ally themselves to a particular candidate and then use the money to support them.
The brothers' Americans for Prosperity PAC has already spent $6.8million on adverts attacking the president.
The pair have trodden a notoriously secretive path in amassing their wealth. But they started to gain more prominence when they helped launch the Tea Party movement.
They are ranked at numbers 18 and 19 on the Forbes 100 Rich List, and have given more than $100million to right-wing causes.
A total of $55million of that has gone in trying to discredit the science behind man-made climate change.
The brothers are co-owners of energy giant Koch industries, the firm founded by their father Fred in 1940, and have since expanded the business to 2,600 times its inherited size.
Initially involved in oil refining, the company is now one of the biggest firm in the country, producing well-known brands such as Stainmaster carpet, Lycra fiber, Quilted Northern tissue and Dixie paper.
They have two other brothers, 78-year-old Fred and 71-year-old William, who were all involved in litigation against each other in the 1980s and 1990s.
Obama raised $224.6million in 2011, more than the total gathered by all four of his Republican challengers.
But sources said Las Vegas casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who has so far bankrolled Newt Gingrich for $10million, attended the event at the at the plush Renaissance Esmeralda resort, in California's India Wells, for the first time.
And a group set up by George W Bush's former special adviser Karl Rove has also set a fundraising target of $200million for the election.
*
OBAMA RETURNS $200K DONATION FROM CASINO OWNER FACING DRUG AND FRAUD CHARGES
Barack Obama's campaign is returning $200,000 in contributions collected by the family members of a Mexican casino owner who fled the U.S. after facing drug and fraud charges.
Obama's team said it would return donations arranged by Chicago brothers Carlos Cardona and Alberto Rojas Cardona - brothers of casino owner Juan Jose Rojas Cardona.
He skipped bail in Iowa in 1994 and has since been linked to violence and corruption in Mexico.
Campaign officials also said they would also return around $100,000 donated by other people connected to Cardona.
Spokesman Ben LaBolt said: 'On the basis of the questions that have been raised, we will return the contributions from these individuals and from any other donors they brought to the campaign.'
Obama Doesn't Want Your $200,000 (If It's Tied to Drugs)
Reuters
Dino Grandoni Feb 7, 2012
What would make President Obama return some $200,000 in campaign donations? Oh, its connection to a drug smuggler and "casino czar" who fled to Mexico will about do it. Some old fashioned public-record detective work (along with Wikileaked cable from the State Department) on the part of The New York Times [ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/us/politics/major-obama-donors-are-tied-to-pepe-cardona-mexican-fugitive.html?pagewanted=all ] revealed that the family of Juan Jose Rojas Cardona, more commonly know as "Pepe," donated about $200,000 to Obama's reelection campaign for what seems to be some favor-currying. And in a nice bit of journalists difference-making, all it took for the Obama campaign to return the money was for The Times's Mike McIntire to ask a question.
When The New York Times asked the Obama campaign early Monday about the Cardonas, officials said they were unaware of the brother [Pepe] in Mexico. Later in the day, the campaign said it was refunding the money raised by the family, which totaled more than $200,000.
Cardona family members still living in the U.S. have made efforts in the past to get Pepe pardoned for his crimes, which today mainly consist of a probation violation in Iowa. But the optics on Pepe get worse after The Times spells out his arrest of smuggling marijuana across the Mexican border in the 1990s, suspicions of his "illegally funneling $5 million into Mexican political campaigns in 2006," and his network of Mexican casinos today.
below is an excerpt from the first link under "Read more" at the bottom of the article in the link above ..
"Nonprofit “social welfare” organizations and other tax-exempt groups with confidential donors have spent more than $24 million in the 2012 cycle on political ads naming President Obama .. http://www.washingtonpost.com/barack-obamas-2012-reelection-campaign/gIQAVODn7O_topic.html?tid=rr_mod_candidate .. or, less frequently, his Republican rivals, according to a Washington Post analysis of data supplied by Kantar Media-CMAG, which tracks ad spending. That accounts for about 40 percent of the money estimated to have been spent on advertising related to the presidential candidates.
Insert: ??? "naming President Obama" .. does "in the 2012 cycle on political ads" means the rep primaries? .. am assuming yes .. i just don't know whether or not there are pro-Obama ads running, guess not.
Crossroads GPS, a nonprofit group backed by GOP political guru Karl Rove, has spent more than $10 million on ads targeting Obama over the federal deficit, energy policies and other issues in the 2012 cycle. American Crossroads, a sister group registered as a super PAC, has spent just $133,000 on such ads, the data show.
The disparity means that nearly all of the broadcast messages that voters have encountered from the Crossroads groups were paid for by persons unknown. The super PAC side of the operation reported taking in $18.2 million in 2011, including $7 million from Texas billionaire Harold Simmons and his company; the nonprofit side raised almost twice as much from unidentified donors.
Mystery political advertising sucks. Am pretty sure all here, still, have to by law finish with something like .. 'This ad is created by/on behalf of..' .. whatever .. followed by the name of an individual or a party. The "still" was included as so many of your 'innovations' :( (superpac) often drift over, and am sure there are many here who would love something similar.
Interesting one, F6, lol, just realized i haven't watched the ad yet. We got different ones, of course.
Aside: whew!!! .. 3 hours in the garden this evening has me beat! .. LOL .. we both need much more work .. hehe ..
In all, the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) in Ann Arbor, Mich., reckons the government’s bailouts of the U.S. auto industry spared more than 1.14 million jobs in 2009, and prevented ‘additional personal income losses’ of nearly $97 billion in 2009 and 2010. Another 314,400 jobs were saved in 2010. The research organization based its conclusions on the potential impact of auto-industry collapse for jobs at U.S. automakers and suppliers, and ripple effects on the economy at large.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
