tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post1901083034784240889..comments2024-03-28T09:54:55.115-05:00Comments on Dad29: Even More, Yet, Again, on The BailoutDad29http://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-32992958955229903902008-09-26T09:02:00.000-05:002008-09-26T09:02:00.000-05:00Does that bridge lead to...Ketchikan?Does that bridge lead to...Ketchikan?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-4417731289361783162008-09-25T11:29:00.000-05:002008-09-25T11:29:00.000-05:00An Obama win, which seems more likely, would have ...<I>An Obama win, which seems more likely, would have a crippling effect on K Street lobbyists</I><BR/><BR/>You must be kidding--or delusional.<BR/><BR/>Lobbyists are equal-opportunity; their job is to influence legislation and regulation. Makes no difference if (D) or (R) is in office.<BR/><BR/>And if you think Obamamama is some sort of vestal virgin, I have a very nice bridge you may wish to purchase....Dad29https://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-57661545076504446642008-09-25T11:17:00.000-05:002008-09-25T11:17:00.000-05:00Fair enough. The fact Davis is currently not an ac...Fair enough. The fact Davis is currently not an active player in his own company is clear enough but he's only on a leave of absence. It's safe to assume he continues to have a very real stake in how that company performs while he's off making a wreck of McCain's campaign (Mike Murphy, where art thou?). Should McCain eek out a victory in November, Davis's company stands to profit BIG TIME. An Obama win, which seems more likely, would have a crippling effect on K Street lobbyists and Davis Manafort would need to diversify.<BR/><BR/>If you follow my point, which may or may not be valid, Davis would seem to be involved if only behind the scenes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-9315008453506828182008-09-24T15:14:00.000-05:002008-09-24T15:14:00.000-05:00There is a distinction to be drawn between Freddie...<I>There is a distinction to be drawn between Freddie/Fannie PAC donations and money from individuals who list their employer as one of the above, no</I><BR/><BR/>Yes. But since everyone knows that Corporations CANNOT contribute to campaigns...As to R/D contrib's, this is no surprise, except for the size of Obama's take.<BR/><BR/>Davis QUIT his company to manage McPain's campaign. Does it occur to you that perhaps his ex-PARTNERS might have earned the monies which were paid to the firm?<BR/><BR/>Or are they simply potted plants?<BR/><BR/>Seems to me that what's significant here is McPain's introduction of legislation to reform Fan/Fred, not what his campaign manager did. The guy was hired b/c he knows from politics.Dad29https://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-10114842421208212452008-09-24T15:02:00.000-05:002008-09-24T15:02:00.000-05:00There is a distinction to be drawn between Freddie...There is a distinction to be drawn between Freddie/Fannie PAC donations and money from individuals who list their employer as one of the above, no? The money seemed to be spread around pretty evenly among D's and R's with R's getting more PAC and D's getting more individual. My head's spinning so maybe this is a non-starter...<BR/><BR/>But is it not a fact Davis (and/or the company that bears his name) rec'd roughly half a million from the COMPANIES based on his proximity to St. John? Why else shower free dough on an ex-lobbyist? I read your link and it is instructive, but why then the payments to a guy who claims he isn't working that corner of the street anymore? Money generally changes hands when services are rendered. When the campaign ends and Davis returns to his day job, won't he benefit from this money in one way or another?<BR/><BR/>It's obvious in light of the last few months that Freddie and Fannie were running on auto-pilot but that does not explain why payments to Davis and/or Davis Manafort WERE made, nor does it shed any light on what the purpose was. Thanks for trying to inject a measure of sanity into this mess.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-69383612220914861192008-09-24T11:07:00.000-05:002008-09-24T11:07:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Dad29https://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-73998422188725483962008-09-24T11:06:00.000-05:002008-09-24T11:06:00.000-05:00Your insinuation about Davis is unfounded. See my ...Your insinuation about Davis is unfounded. See my post on the topic immediately below this one.<BR/><BR/>Obama was both an empty suit AND a happy recipient of mega-bucks from Fan/Fred.<BR/><BR/>"Empty suit" doesn't mean that he never voted Party-Line--which he did.<BR/><BR/>It simply means that there's very little there in leadership--and, I think, even less in original ideas.Dad29https://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-88310714244992021372008-09-24T10:06:00.000-05:002008-09-24T10:06:00.000-05:00Re: #5...Where's the honorable mention for St. Joh...Re: #5...<BR/><BR/>Where's the honorable mention for St. John's capable campaign chair Rick Davis and his $15k/month "retainer" from Freddie Mac. Davis and Dodd definitely dropped their trousers when big Freddie came calling....your "O and Savior" is no angel but linking him to this financial fubar contradicts your previous contention that he was an empty suit as a US Senator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com