Perhaps Obama can raise that $1 billion and someone can finally find evidence to impeach him and we can put the billion in the US Treasury. Obama will have done one decent thing and we’ll be rid of him. He won’t suffer though because he’ll write a book about how he managed to pull the wool over the eyes of millions of adoring people and how he did everything possible to ignore the Constitution and got away with it. It will be a best seller and he’ll make millions off of it.

If youve already made a contribution and still see this message dont worry – the system will update shortly.. I am not in a noose and do not plan on putting people in a noose…Maybe we should look beyond the fact that Obama wears a tie and at least plant a seed towards returning peace and security to this continent…A vote for McCain is probably a vote for the very people who only get their dicks up when there is a bloodbath involved.

sc;Rich folks are just as nice as poor folks, I come in contact with both on a regular basis.It is not the individual it usually ends up being the corporation that ends up looking bad when they send jobs over seas to countries like Communist China that give tax breaks,have child labor,no pollution standards polluting the same air we breathe and do everything to give their companies unfair advantage.Forget the air part I know you wouldn’t understand that one.It is after the elections when the damage is done by lobbiests having the banking rules written to screw you, easing up on the pollution standards enough to choke your silly a– and now they want the Senior citizens of America to give up Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.Other than that everything is pretty honky dory.

Be prepared to wait on the current occupant’s Justice Dept. to do anything about it– it’ll be a LONG one, if EVER……

Here we have another prime example of psychotic, progressive ‘reasoning,’ folks. We’re supposed to think that rich folks (as a group) are BAD people and need to be put into their place. However, when it comes to politics, well, that’s “different.
Now, the only thing that matters in politics is GETTING ELECTED (or re-elected).
That means RICH folks are now “OK.” – especially if you want to see your favorite career criminal elected/re-elected. ‘Situational ethics’ are for criminals and their pals. Get it?
Between elections, RICH types are to be shunned and marginalized. When it’s time to elect another political god, the rules are reversed and RICH folks are now OK.
Curious reasoning, eh? So what else do you expect from psychotics and pimps? We’d be better off if we never saw a politician on a TV or heard the bastards on a radio. Let them do it the old-fashioned way, when they had to stump from state to state.
BUYING an election is far begond immoral, you pathetic prohressives. It makes you the SAME as those you claim to hate. ‘Morality of the moment’ is an EXCUSE. It is NOT a religion, it is social engineering at its worst, you retards.

Raymond Harbin;Well what would you suggest we find a candidate that would get his money from the multi-billionaire Koch brothers, the US Chamber of Commerce that represents China,France,India,Wall Street, big oil and Pharma.Our votes only count to get them elected and after they are in the lobbiests take over so it was basically a waste of time voting.You mentioned a certified bank, however I don’t put too much trust in our banking system today.Even worse than the banks is the bailout of Wall Street giving them 100 cents on the dollar and in return we get all their bad deals we have to pay for for decades.

SELLING THE CHAIR OF AMERICA’S PRESIDENCY HAS ALWAYS SEEMED UNAMERICAN TO ME. IS THIS ANY WHERE NEAR THIS REPUBLIC’S COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY AND FAIRNESS TO ALL CITIZENS, THAT THE POSITION IS LIMITED ONLY TO THOSE CANDIDATES WHO ARE WEALTHY, AND ARMED WITH SUPPORTERS SUCH AS ULTRA-RICH RADICAL GEORGE SOROS AND GIANT LABOR UNIONS, WHOSE DONATIONS ARE SUBSIDIZED BY THE TAX PAYERS–AND MADE RICHER BY THESE TAX PAYERS’S “FEDERAL” BAILOUTS. WHERE IS THE FAIRNESS IN THIS?

WHY NOT LIMIT LIMIT EACH PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE TO AN EQUAL PURSE–SAY $100M , ZERO GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES, AND ALL DONATIONS FILTERED THROUGH CERTIFIED BANKS–AND CUT OFF AT THE DESIGNATED LIMIT AND SERVING AS THE SINGLE, LEGAL SOURCE OF THE CANDIDATE’S CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES. THOSE FOUND ILLEGALLY ACCEPTING OUTSIDE FUNDS, SUBJECT TO ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE REDUCTIONS PROPORTIONATE TO THE SIZE OF THE CRIMINAL OVER-DONATION. IT COULD COST THEM THE ELECTION.

GOOD IDEA? YES, FOR A LARGE NUMBER OF VOTERS– PROBABILITY OF A SUSTAINING LEGISLATION? VIRTUALLY NIL. MONEY TALKS, AND THE GREATER THE AMOUNT, THE LOUDER IT SCREAMS TO THE COVERT BENEFIT OF THOSE STANDING NEAR THE CHANNEL OF FLOW.