Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

xaos · By: **xaos** On: Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:33 am

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/06/clear-channel-s-directors-give-big-to-romney-who-won-t-criticize-limbaugh.html

The directors of Clear Channel, which hosts Rush Limbaugh’s show, have been big donors to Mitt Romney’s campaigns, which might help explain why Romney has been so reluctant to criticize Rush.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/26/1095014/-Bain-Capital-and-Mitt-Romney-s-Best-Kept-Secret-Clear-Channel-Radio

samhill · By: **samhill** On: Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:21 pm

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... -the-most/
Yep, they know how to save & create jobs, the only reason for the stage & assembly of all the workers that I can figure is so they could see the expression on the employees faces, he likes to fire people. Otherwise why waste the money & time?

plumb-r · By: **plumb-r** On: Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:20 pm

So you want to go there? Jeffrey Immelt CEO of GE was selected as Obama's advisor on job creation and competitiveness. GE has made sizeable donations to the Obama campain. GE is the parent company of NBC television. No wonder they can't report the real news on any of their stations.It gets better.The recovery act funneled over 90 billion in US funds to renewable energy sources. GE is the largest wind turbine producer and has it's sights on being the largest solar panel producer. GE paid No Taxes in 2010 dispite posting a 14.2 billion dollar profit. Of course you never heard any of this because NBC only reports happy happy thoughts about Obama. All this sounds like good old Chicago politics to me. You give me money so I can win the election and when I'm made president I'll give you a title,fill your pockets full of money and you won't have to pay a dime in taxes. Yea tax those making over 250,000? :idea:

samhill · By: **samhill** On: Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:54 pm

GE plays both sides from the middle, always have & always will unless it ever becomes able to be stopped. Look it up GE pays little to no tax for decades & gets subsidies to boot, ain't that what the cons are willing to lead the country :flush:

in order to keep?

Ed.A · By: **Ed.A** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:23 am

plumb-r wrote:So you want to go there?

Plumb-r, don't forget all the "green Energy" companies whose backers and CEO's gave Thousands to BO's campaign, took our money went belly up, stuck us with the losses and old Barkey and his pals walk away with their pockets stuffed.
Which reminds me, how much did we lose on GM? Of course the UNions own it now so we know where that's gonna end up.

samhill · By: **samhill** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:15 am

Odd that the biggest greenie to go bellie up was a con with many con backers, going bankrupt has long been & still is a way( for the ones that know the game) to lose others money & keep your own kind of what Bain did/does. As far as I know we haven't lost anything on GM (I''ll recheck) it's still GM not UAWs.
The GM thing isn't over yet, as far as the reorganized Co.s go both have repaid, there was a lot of what I would consider trickery that went on. New Co.s were formed & as with the first deal was & will be lost, under the TARP to begin with there was no payback provision, I said long ago for the bank side I thought it was HUSH money, a gift. The Gov. still has like a 30% share of GM stock so a lot depends on how GM does & when stock is sold. At the time of TARP there was no other option, it was either a bailout or collapse & then there would have been a million + more on UC & retraining programs for jobs that don't exist.

franco b · By: **franco b** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:00 pm

samhill wrote:it was either a bailout or collapse & then there would have been a million + more on UC & retraining programs for jobs that don't exist.

Your thinking is skewed. If GM had gone belly up do you think the demand for cars and the jobs to build them would disappear? Another more efficient company or companies would build the cars and provide the jobs, perhaps even take over GM.

You can't have the benefits of a free market while bailing out those who cannot compete in it. That applies to the banks too. A lot of the rich people would be a lot less rich if market forces had been allowed to operate. It has also been the Obama policy to enrich the rich further by propping up the stock market while giving lip service to soaking the rich. He and the Fed. with their wild inflationary practices have provided the money people with hundreds of new ways to gamble while suffering no losses.

samhill · By: **samhill** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:35 pm

Franco, look in front of you then glance into the rear view mirror, chances are you see a foreign car, many have the newest most modern plants right here in the U.S.A. & are doing well, have been all along. For awhile most had some real crap but kept listening to what American drivers wanted & never sat back on their laurels. Just where was another entrepreneur going to get the $ for yet another start up let alone take over GM. Once gone it & Chrysler were gone, millions more on the Gov. handouts. Easy to say let them die if your sitting back & not being effected. Definitely would have thrown us into a deeper recession & most probably a depression. Hey, maybe that would have been the best thing to happen since the last depression, I often heard that time talked about like it was the best of times. NOT!

homecomfort · By: **homecomfort** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:52 pm

how many defense contractors, were bailed out under repub Bush? at least Obama spending is right here in usa. Saw many signs along major highway 287, touting American recovery and reinvestment act money being spent.I think better than rebuilding roads in Iraq and Afghanistan, but then, some results actually have to be shown when money is spent here. I wonder how many nay sayers would accept 10 tons of free anthracite, from reinvestment $ to help coal industry?, all of you's I bet !!..

anthony7812 · By: **anthony7812** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:07 pm

homecomfort wrote:I wonder how many nay sayers would accept 10 tons of free anthracite, from reinvestment $ to help coal industry?, all of you's I bet !!..

Now I would most certainly accept a nice 10 ton delivery. But lets get real.... is it really free. This is where the point lies, you cannot rob peter to pay paul. The coal industry is probably not having a hard time with residential users. I have a feeling it lies more with GOVERNMENT regulations on industrial usage.

Dann757 · By: **Dann757** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:21 pm

My buddy who never voted just registered to vote~ for Romney.

Obama has had over 100 fundraisers in the last six months, and not one meeting with his jobs commitee.

Rush rocks! I was painting the house of a local bigwig and Army Veteran a couple years ago, he was playing Rush on the radio. Now that's America.

This was another lib attack post; they have not one thing positive to say about Obama's record.

Richard S. · By: **Richard S.** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:57 pm

Dann757 wrote:Rush rocks!

The irony is Rush is one of the few conservative bands around.

"The Trees"

There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas

The trouble with the maples
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade

There is trouble in the forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the maples scream 'Oppression!'
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
'The oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light'
Now there's no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw

franco b · By: **franco b** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:45 pm

samhill wrote: Definitely would have thrown us into a deeper recession & most probably a depression.

Exactly. That's how a market corrects imbalances such as excessive debt. It wipes the slate clean. By this time we would have been well out of it and growing strongly. Instead we face decades of going nowhere with ever increasing debt, unemployment, and inflation. Only the rich will profit under present conditions and get ever richer. The poor will get poorer and more and more of the middle class will join them. In the end the market will have its way anyhow, only with a much larger crash.

jpete · By: **jpete** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:53 pm

franco b wrote:
samhill wrote: Definitely would have thrown us into a deeper recession & most probably a depression.

Exactly. That's how a market corrects imbalances such as excessive debt. It wipes the slate clean. By this time we would have been well out of it and growing strongly. Instead we face decades of going nowhere with ever increasing debt, unemployment, and inflation. Only the rich will profit under present conditions and get ever richer. The poor will get poorer and more and more of the middle class will join them. In the end the market will have its way anyhow, only with a much larger crash.

And Sam will keep cheer leading for that which he disagrees.

Ed.A · By: **Ed.A** On: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:15 pm

homecomfort wrote:how many defense contractors, were bailed out under repub Bush? at least Obama spending is right here in usa. Saw many signs along major highway 287, touting American recovery and reinvestment act money being spent.I think better than rebuilding roads in Iraq and Afghanistan, but then, some results actually have to be shown when money is spent here. I wonder how many nay sayers would accept 10 tons of free anthracite, from reinvestment $ to help coal industry?, all of you's I bet !!..

Yeah Right Kiddo....the creep in chief on tape laughing about the destruction of lives. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03v2Oq9NRC4

Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney

Re: Clear Channel’s Directors Give Big to Romney