Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (194213)

7/18/2012 9:24:17 AM

From: Sam

Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 543438

Who gives skads of money to Mitt? You can guess the names. But opensecrets tells you for sure. At least, of the groups that are counted.

This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2012 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization's members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates. Groups with national networks of donors - like EMILY's List and Club for Growth - make for particularly big bundlers.

Goldman Sachs	$593,080
JPMorgan Chase & Co	$467,089
Bank of America	$425,100
Morgan Stanley	$399,850
Credit Suisse Group	$390,360
Citigroup Inc	$312,800
Kirkland & Ellis	$264,302
Wells Fargo	$237,550
Barclays	$234,650
PricewaterhouseCoopers	$227,250
Deloitte LLP	$222,250
HIG Capital	$216,995
UBS AG	$207,750
Blackstone Group	$198,800
Bain Capital	$156,500
Elliott Management	$146,275
Marriott International	$137,827
General Electric	$135,450
Bain & Co	$130,550
EMC Corp	$129,450

opensecrets.org

To: Sam who wrote (194213)	7/18/2012 9:26:15 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543438

I agree. Without roads, and police, and fire, and laws regulating copyright infringement, and patent infringement, and courts to enforce contracts, and a society where folks are educated enough to do the work that needs to be done, I don't see how you could ever have a sophisticated business. You could certainly get a bunch of folks together and go bonk the neighbors on the head and take their stuff, and absent a government you could be a subsistence farmer (until someone came and bonked you on the head, and took your stuff)- but all things more complicated require some sort of government, and the more complicated things get, the more reliant on government we all are. I like our complex world. The more complex it gets, the more fun it gets. I think most people get what Obama was trying to say, and the folks who don't are probably wingnuts and republicants who take from the government, but are too hypocritical to want to support it. What can you do with people like that? Obama will no doubt refine his message. I have no doubt of that. What poor little rich Mitten going to do? Government helped him get to where he is. It even helped make him wealthy. Should be interesting to see him try to argue he did it all himself, when he quite clearly did not. He is a creature of the state- who is involved in a complex dance of self loathing.

To: Sam who wrote (194213)	7/18/2012 9:51:49 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543438

I NEVER agree with John Podhoretz. Or his father. Well, almost never, because I agree with him on this (see below). I think I disagree with you and Podhoretz here, though it's terribly difficult to see precisely what he his arguing. Campaigns inevitably produce these kinds of moments in which candidates, tired or out of sorts or whatever, misstate a message that is completely clear from the context. If they are now to be hammered for even the slightest misstatement, then we might as well give them a script from which they read, and we lose all spontaneity. All of it. I think we cut them slack on these sorts of things. Both of them.