Obama got 7x more from Goldman Sachs than Bush got from Enron

[1bad65]

Fair enough but the conection between washington and Enron was more than just campaign contrabutions. Enron got legislation in there favor, can goldman sachs say the same?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can say the same. And who was sleeping with one of their executives and taking campaign money from them?

[Reality_Check]

WTF?? I brought them up because they gave a ton of cash to Obama, yet the press doesn't care much. But when Enron was in the news, they were linked to Bush at every opportunity.

Hmm...the press doesn't care much?

CNBC

President Barack Obama answered questions on this topic in an interview with CNBC's John Harwood on April 21, 2010.

"In the 2008 campaign, you got a lot of money, about $1 million from employees of Goldman Sachs," Harwood said. "Your former White House counsel Greg Craig is apparently going to represent Goldman Sachs. In light of this case, do either of those things embarrass you?"

Business Week

Goldman Donations to Obama Campaign Totaled Nearly $1 Million

CNN

According to Federal Election Commission figures compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, Goldman Sachs' political action committee and individual contributors who listed the company as their employer donated $994,795 during 2007 and 2008 to Obama's presidential campaign, the second-highest contribution from a company PAC and company employees

The Wall Street Journal

Republicans have noted that Goldman Sachs employees gave Mr. Obama nearly $1 million during the campaign, making the company his second-largest source of donations. Mr. Obama hasn't said if he would return the Goldman donations in the wake of recent allegations against the company.

Yep, it looks like it's being completely ignored. To your point, they don't mention the "7x what George W. Bush received from Enron" part. Probably because, as I've shown, it's not true.

[Reality_Check]

Fair enough but the conection between washington and Enron was more than just campaign contrabutions. Enron got legislation in there favor, can goldman sachs say the same?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can say the same. And who was sleeping with one of their executives and taking campaign money from them?

Ah...but he asked about Goldman Sachs.

[Reality_Check]

I'm just stating the facts. No need to imply anything.

So, was there favoritism shown by the White House due to the campaign contributions? Yes or no.

[1bad65]

So, was there favoritism shown by the White House due to the campaign contributions? Yes or no.

That is moot.

The point is that he took the $990k in campaign money, then accused them of wrongdoing, and now refuses to give back the money he himself is saying was made by breaking the law! Hypocracy at its finest.

[1bad65]

Yep, it looks like it's being completely ignored. To your point, they don't mention the "7x what George W. Bush received from Enron" part. Probably because, as I've shown, it's not true.

Even if we use your numbers, it's still like 3x-4x, correct?

[Reality_Check]

Even if we use your numbers, it's still like 3x-4x, correct?

No, more like slightly less that 1.5 times. Though it's actually less than that as I'm using unadjusted numbers for the contributions from Enron to George W. Bush.

Please note, President Obama received roughly 1.6x what President Bush received from Goldman Sachs.

[Reality_Check]

That is moot.

Well SanHeChuan did ask you a question (twice) about favoritism and Goldman Sachs. As you are pushing Pork Chop to answer one of your questions on the "Tea Party" thread, it only seems appropriate that you answer the direct question put to you by both SanHeChuan and me.

So, to quote a wise man:

You didn't answer the question.

And you can call me names, I don't care, but just answer the question

Not to be a jerk, but maybe The Duck should answer the question then.

So I asked you to answer this question:

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/...postcount=1237

You didn't answer the question.

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/...&postcount=746

Try answering the question:

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/...&postcount=749

Answer the question, please

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/...&postcount=382

I notice you did not answer the question about your hero's lying though....

[1bad65]

Well SanHeChuan did ask you a question (twice) about favoritism and Goldman Sachs.

It's a moot point.

Again, by Obama's own admission, he got over $900k of dirty money that he refuses to give back. If you or I took dirty money (drug money, stolen money, etc) it would be seized and we would be facing criminal charges. I thought we were all equal under the law?

[1bad65]

Fine, you win. I'll answer it. Remember, you asked for it.

Yes, they received favoritism.

1) In March 2009, it was reported that, in 2008, Goldman Sachs, alongside other major US and international financial institutions, had received billions of dollars during the unwind of credit default swap (CDS) contracts purchased from AIG, including $12.9bn from funds provided by the US Federal Reserve to bail out AIG.

2) Former Goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson was named as chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, despite President Barack Obama's campaign promise that he would limit the influence of lobbyists in his administration.

And then we have this:

"While Goldman Sachs' lawyers negotiated with the Securities and Exchange Commission over potentially explosive civil fraud charges, Goldman's chief executive visited the White House at least four times.

White House logs show that Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein traveled to Washington for at least two events with President Barack Obama, whose 2008 presidential campaign received $994,795 in donations from Goldman's employees and their relatives. He also met twice with Obama's top economic adviser, Larry Summers.

Meanwhile, however, Goldman is retaining former Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig as a member of its legal team. In addition, when he worked as an investment banker in Chicago a decade ago, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel advised one client who also retained Goldman as an adviser on the same $8.2 billion deal."

Sources:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/2...-to-white.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6735898
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/bu...1&ref=business

Now will you please address why Obama refuses to give back money he claims was made by breaking the law.

[Reality_Check]

Fine, you win. I'll answer it. Remember, you asked for it.

Yes, they received favoritism.

1) In March 2009, it was reported that, in 2008, Goldman Sachs, alongside other major US and international financial institutions, had received billions of dollars during the unwind of credit default swap (CDS) contracts purchased from AIG, including $12.9bn from funds provided by the US Federal Reserve to bail out AIG.

2) Former Goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson was named as chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, despite President Barack Obama's campaign promise that he would limit the influence of lobbyists in his administration.

And then we have this:

"While Goldman Sachs' lawyers negotiated with the Securities and Exchange Commission over potentially explosive civil fraud charges, Goldman's chief executive visited the White House at least four times.

White House logs show that Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein traveled to Washington for at least two events with President Barack Obama, whose 2008 presidential campaign received $994,795 in donations from Goldman's employees and their relatives. He also met twice with Obama's top economic adviser, Larry Summers.

Meanwhile, however, Goldman is retaining former Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig as a member of its legal team. In addition, when he worked as an investment banker in Chicago a decade ago, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel advised one client who also retained Goldman as an adviser on the same $8.2 billion deal."

Sources:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/2...-to-white.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6735898
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/bu...1&ref=business

Now will you please address why Obama refuses to give back money he claims was made by breaking the law.

You do realize that #1 happened under the Bush Administration, right?

And as for President Obama not giving back the contributions, I don't know why. I can only go by what he says the reasons are (and, with him being a politician, they have to be taken with a large grain of salt). I guess the answer will depend on how many, if any, of the individual Goldman employees/executives who make up that $994k are found guilty of fraud. Please remember, Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling were convicted in Federal Court (though Ken Lay died before being sentenced and his conviction was thrown out as all of his appeals weren't exhausted prior to his death).

[1bad65]

You do realize that #1 happened under the Bush Administration, right?

Obama voted to give out that money as well.

And as for President Obama not giving back the contributions, I don't know why. I can only go by what he says the reasons are (and, with him being a politician, they have to be taken with a large grain of salt). I guess the answer will depend on how many, if any, of the individual Goldman employees/executives who make up that $994k are found guilty of fraud. Please remember, Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling were convicted in Federal Court (though Ken Lay died before being sentenced and his conviction was thrown out as all of his appeals weren't exhausted prior to his death).

Thank you for the honest answer. But you do admit it's hypocritical to say the money was made by breaking the law, but you are keeping your part of it, right? And then, after he keeps his part of the money, he wants to prosecute the guys who gave it to him! I just wish you guys could see that while Bush was not the greatest President (yes, I admit it), this lying buffoon is even worse.

[Reality_Check]

Obama voted to give out that money as well.

Are you sure about that? The Fed, under the Bush Administration, was responsible for the bailout of AIG, not Congress.

Thank you for the honest answer. But you do admit it's hypocritical to say the money was made by breaking the law, but you are keeping your part of it, right? And then, after he keeps his part of the money, he wants to prosecute the guys who gave it to him! I just wish you guys could see that while Bush was not the greatest President (yes, I admit it), this lying buffoon is even worse.

Did President Bush give back the money contributed to his campaigns by Enron? As for the hypocrisy charge, wouldn't it be hypocritical to insist others give back money while keeping it oneself? Has President Obama done that?

I think this would be an example of hypocrisy:

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index....o_goldman.html

Although Boehner's press release contains a link to data on the Center for Responsive Politics Web site that lists Goldman Sachs as Obama's No. 2 political contributor during the 2008 election cycle, it neglected to cite a link on the same Web site that reveals Goldman Sachs was the No. 2 contributor to Boehner's own Freedom Project political action committee during the 2004 election cycle.

The group's data shows Goldman Sachs gave more than $100,000 to Boehner and his political groups since 1998: $73,000 to the Freedom Project and $27,600 to Boehner's congressional re-election campaign.

Asked whether Boehner would refund the money he got from Goldman Sachs, spokesman Cory Fritz emailed this reply: " The president's pushing a bill supported by and benefiting a top contributor -- that's the issue."

Of course, it would appear that more Goldman Sachs money is going to Republicans these days instead of to Democrats.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36137.html

Goldman Sachs’ political action committee dished out nearly $300,000 to lawmakers’ campaigns and their PACs in March, with more going to Republicans than Democrats, federal campaign filings released Tuesday show.

[mawali]

Why would Goldman Sachs employees support a liberal presidential candidate? Does this make sense to anyone?

These companies give to anyone!
They may give 15% to x, 25% to y, 5% to z, etc as a way to hedge their bets so they do not give to one person. The bootom line is who they can buy with what amount.
The bottom line is that the excesses must be stopped. If one is dissatisfied with the status quo, then things must change.

[1bad65]

These companies give to anyone!
They may give 15% to x, 25% to y, 5% to z, etc as a way to hedge their bets so they do not give to one person. The bootom line is who they can buy with what amount.
The bottom line is that the excesses must be stopped. If one is dissatisfied with the status quo, then things must change.

They give to both sides not buy influence, but to try and keep lawmakers from targeting them. It's alot like old school Mafia 'protection'.

Look at Microsoft. Prior to the Clinton Administration going after them for being a monopoly, they gave very little to either Party. But once their business was targetted, they began giving alot more campaign contributions to politicians.