You said that you "researched" Counterpunch, as if you'd never heard of it before. You seemed to be saying that Counterpunch was not a good enough source of information, so I figured maybe you'd heard of Z Magazine, which also carried the piece. But Counterpunch actually is quite reputable, and known for being not biased in favor of either Democrats or Republicans. p --- In NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Melinda Iley-Dohn <Iley_dohn@...> wrote: > > Good enough for what? Are you expecting me to just buy into a magazine article and ignore > public records of campaign contributions, reported income statements and other sources I have sent you. If this is so credible why isn't Hillary Clinton, who is desparate to win Texas, > not using this against him? McCain is gunning for him too. I would think that Matthew Drudge or one of the other right wingers would use this. > > Pamela Somers <psomers1@...> wrote: > Really? Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair not good enough for > you? How about Z Magazine then? > > http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16601 > > p > > --- In NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Melinda Iley-Dohn <Iley_dohn@> > wrote: > > > > Great. I did a background on CounterPunch. They don't look that > objective. Check out a few others. > > http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/02/02/2008-02- > 02_barack_obamas_moneymaker_site.html > > > > http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/allsummary.asp? > CID=N00009638 > > > > http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/02/28/fundraising/ > > Pamela Somers <psomers1@> wrote: > > Obama's Money Cartel > > How he's fronted for the most vicious firms on Wall Street > > February 23, 2008 By Pam Martens > > Source: CounterPunch > > > > Wall Street, known variously as a barren wasteland for > diver­sity or > > the last plantation in America, has defied courts and the Equal > > Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for decades in its failure > > to hire blacks as stockbrokers. Now it's marshal­ling its money > > machine to elect a black man to the highest office in the land. Why > > isn't the press curious about this? > > > > Walk into any of the largest Wall Street brokerage firms today and > > you'll see a self-portrait of upper management rac­ism and > sexism: > > women sitting at secre­tarial desks outside fancy offices > occupied by > > predominantly white males. According to the EEOC as well as the > > recent racial discrimination class actions filed against UBS and > > Merrill Lynch, blacks make up between 1 per cent to 3.5 per cent of > > stockbrokers - and this after 30 years of litigation, settlements > and > > empty prom­ises to do better by the largest Wall Street firms. > > > > The first clue to an entrenched white male bastion seeking a black > > male occupant in the oval office (having placed only five blacks in > > the U.S. Senate in the last two centuries) appeared this month on a > > chart at the Center for Responsive Politics website. It was a list > of > > the 20 top con­tributors to the Barack Obama campaign, and it > looked > > like one of those compre­hension tests where you match up > things that > > go together and eliminate those that don't. Of the 20 top > > contributors, I elimi­nated six that didn't compute. I was now > looking > > at a sight only slightly less fright­ening to democracy than a > Diebold > > vot­ing machine. It was a Wall Street cartel of financial > firms, their > > registered lobbyists, ! and go-to law firms that have a death grip > on > > our federal government. > > > > Why is the "yes, we can" candidate in bed with this cartel? How can > > we, the people, make change if Obama's money backers block our > > ability to be heard? > > > > Seven of the Obama campaign's top 14 donors consist of officers and > > em­ployees of the same Wall Street firms charged time and again > with > > looting the public and newly implicated in originat­ing and/or > > bundling fraudulently made mortgages. These latest frauds have left > > thousands of children in some of our largest minority communities > > coming home from school to see eviction notices and foreclosure > signs > > nailed to their front doors. Those scars will last a lifetime. > > > > These seven Wall Street firms are (in order of money given): > Goldman > > Sachs, UBS AG, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan > > Stanley and Credit Suisse. There is also a large hedge fund, > Citadel > > Investment Group, which is a major source of fee income to Wall > > Street. There are five large corporate law firms that are also > > registered lobbyists; and one is a corporate law firm that is no > > longer a registered lobbyist but does legal work for Wall Street. > The > > cumula­tive total of these 14 contributors through February 1, > 2008, > > was $2,872,128, and we're still in the primary season. > > > > But hasn't Senator Obama repeatedly told us in ads and speeches and > > debates that he wasn't taking money from reg­istered lobbyists? > Hasn't > > the press given him a free pass on this statement? > > > > Barack Obama, speaking in Greenville, South Carolina, on January > 22, > > 2008: > > > > "Washington lobbyists haven't funded my campaign, they won't run my > > White House, and they will not drown out the voices of working > > Americans when I am president". > > > > Barack Obama, in an email to support­ers on June 25, 2007, as > reported > > by the Boston Globe: > > > > "Candidates typically spend a week like this ? right before the > > critical June 30th financial reporting deadline ? on the phone, day > > and night, begging Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs > to > > write huge checks. Not me. Our campaign has rejected the money- for- > in­ > > fluence game and refused to accept funds from registered federal > > lobbyists and po­litical action committees". > > > > The Center for Responsive Politics' website allows one to pull up > the > > filings made by lobbyists registering under the Lobbying Disclosure > > Act of 1995 with the clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives and > > secretary of the U.S. Senate. These top five contributors to the > > Obama campaign have filed as registered lobbyists: Sidley Austin > LLP; > > Skadden, Arps, et al; Jenner & Block; Kirkland & Ellis; Wilmerhale, > > aka Wilmer Cutler Pickering. > > > > Is it possible that Senator Obama does not know that corporate law > > firms are also frequently registered lobbyists? Or is he making a > > distinction that because these funds are coming from the > employ­ees of > > these firms, he's not really taking money directly from registered > > lobby­ists? That thesis seems disingenuous when many of these > > individual donors own these law firms as equity partners or > > shareholders and share in the profits gen­erated from lobbying. > > > > Far from keeping his distance from lobbyists, Senator Obama and his > > cam­paign seems to be brainstorming with them. > > > > The political publication, The Hill, re­ported on December 20, > 2007, > > that three salaried aides on the Obama campaign were registered > > lobbyists for dozens of corporations. (The Obama campaign said they > > had stopped lobbying since joining the campaign.) Bob Bauer, > counsel > > to the Obama campaign, is an attorney with Perkins Coie. That law > > firm is also a reg­istered lobbyist. > > > > What might account for this persistent (but non-reality based) > theme > > of distanc­ing the Obama campaign from lobbyists? Odds are it > traces > > back to one of the largest corporate lobbyist spending sprees in > the > > history of Washington whose details would cast an unwholesome pall > on > > the Obama campaign, unless our cognitive abilities are regularly > > bombarded with abstract vacuities of hope and change and > sentimental > > homages to Dr. King and President Kennedy . > > > > On February 10, 2005, Senator Obama voted in favor of the passage > of > > the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. Senators Biden, Boxer, Byrd, > > Clinton, Corzine, Durbin, Feingold, Kerry, Leahy, Reid and 16 other > > Democrats voted against it. It passed the Senate 72-26 and was > signed > > into law on February 18, 2005. > > > > Here is an excerpt of remarks Senator Obama made on the Senate > floor > > on February 14, 2005, concerning the pas­sage of this > legislation: > > > > "Every American deserves their day in court. This bill, while not > > perfect, gives people that day while still providing the reasonable > > reforms necessary to safe­guard against the most blatant abuses > of the > > system. I also hope that the federal judiciary takes seriously > their > > expanded role in class action litigation, and upholds their > > responsibility to fairly certify class actions so that they may > > protect our civil and consumer rights..". > > > > Three days before Senator Obama ex­pressed that fateful yea > vote, 14 > > state attorneys general, including Lisa Madigan of Senator Obama's > > home state of Illinois, filed a letter with the Senate and House, > > pleading to stop the passage of this cor­porate giveaway. The > AGs > > wrote: "State attorneys general frequently investigate and bring > > actions against defendants who have caused harm to our citizens... > In > > some instances, such actions have been brought with the attorney > > general acting as the class representative for the con­sumers > of the > > state. We are concerned that certain provisions of S.5 might be > > misinterpreted to impede the ability of the attorneys general to > > bring such ac­tions..." > > > > The Senate also received a desper­ate plea from more than 40 > civil > > rights and labor organizations, including the NAACP, Lawyers > > Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Human Rights Campaign, > American > > Civil Liberties Union, Center for Justice and Democracy, Legal > > Momentum (formerly NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund), and > > Alliance for Justice. They wrote as fol­lows: > > > > "Under the [Class Action Fairness Act of 2005], citizens are denied > > the right to use their own state courts to bring class actions > > against corporations that violate these state wage and hour and > state > > civil rights laws, even where that corporation has hundreds of > > employees in that state. Moving these state law cases into federal > > court will delay and likely deny justice for working men and women > > and victims of discrimination. The federal courts are al­ready > > overburdened. Additionally, federal courts are less likely to > certify > > classes or provide relief for violations of state law". > > > > This legislation, which dramatically im­paired labor rights, > consumer > > rights and civil rights, involved five years of pres­sure from > 100 > > corporations, 475 lobby­ists, tens of millions of corporate > dollars > > buying influence in our government, and the active participation of > > the Wall Street firms now funding the Obama campaign. "The Civil > > Justice Reform Group, a busi­ness alliance comprising general > counsels > > from Fortune 100 firms, was instrumen­tal in drafting the class- > action > > bill", says Public Citizen. > > > > One of the hardest-working registered lobbyists to push this > > corporate giveaway was the law firm Mayer-Brown, hired by the > leading > > business lobby group, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. According to > the > > Center for Responsive Politics, the Chamber of Commerce spent $16 > > million in just 2003, lobbying the government on various business > > issues, including class action reform. > > > > According to a 2003 report from Public Citizen, Mayer-Brown's class- > > action lobbyists included "Mark Gitenstein, for­mer chief > counsel to > > the Senate Judiciary Committee and a leading architect of the > Senate > > strategy in support of class-action legislation; John Schmitz, who > > was deputy counsel to President George H.W. Bush; David McIntosh, > > former Republican congressman from Indiana; and Jeffrey Lewis, who > > was on the staffs of both Sen. John Breaux (D-La) and Rep. Billy > > Tauzin (R-La)." > > > > While not on the Center for Responsive Politics list of the top 20 > > contributors to the Obama presidential campaign, Mayer-Brown's > > partners and employees are in rarefied company, giving a total of > > $92,817 through December 31, 2007, to the Obama campaign. (The firm > > is also defending Merrill Lynch in court against charges of racial > > discrimination.) > > > > Senator Obama graduated Harvard Law magna cum laude and was the > first > > black president of the Harvard Law Review. Given those credentials, > > one assumes that he understood the ramifica­tions to the poor > and > > middle class in this country as he helped to gut one of the few > > weapons left to seek justice against giant corporations and their > > legions of giant law firms. The class-action vehicle confers upon > > each citizen one of the most powerful rights in our society: the > > ability to function as a private attorney general and seek redress > > for wrongs inflicted on ourselves as well as for those similarly > > injured that might not otherwise have a voice. > > > > Those rights should have been strengthened, not restricted, at this > > dangerous time in our nation's history. According to a > comprehensive > > report from the nonprofit group, United for a Fair Economy, over > the > > past eight years the total loss of wealth for people of color is > > between $164 billion and $213 billion, for subprime loans which is > > the greatest loss of wealth for people of color in mod­ern > history: > > > > "According to federal data, people of color are three times more > > likely to have subprime loans: high-cost loans account for 55 per > > cent of loans to blacks, but only 17 per cent of loans to whites". > > > > If there had been equitable distribution of subprime loans, losses > > for white people would be 44.5 per cent higher and losses for > people > > of color would be about 24 per cent lower. "This is evidence of > > systemic prejudice and institutional racism." > > > > Before the current crisis, based on improvements in median > household > > net worth, it would take 594 more years for blacks to achieve > parity > > with whites. The current crisis is likely to stretch this even > > further. > > > > So, how should we react when we learn that the top contributors to > > the Obama campaign are the very Wall Street firms whose shady > > mortgage lenders buried the elderly and the poor and minority under > > predatory loans? How should we react when we learn that on the big > > donor list is Citigroup, whose former employee at CitiFinancial > > testified to the Federal Trade Commission that it was standard > > practice to target people based on race and educational level, with > > the sales force winning bonuses called "Rocopoly Money" (like a > sick > > board game), after "blitz" nights of soliciting loans by phone? How > > should we react when we learn that these very same firms, arm in > arm > > with their corporate lawyers and registered lobbyists, have > weakened > > our ability to fight back with the class-action vehicle? > > > > Should there be any doubt left as to who owns our government? The > > very same cast of characters making the Obama hit parade of > campaign > > loot are the clever creators of the industry solu­tions to the > wave of > > foreclosures gripping this nation's poor and middle class, > effec­ > > tively putting the solution in the hands of the robbers. The names > of > > these pro­grams (that have failed to make a dent in the > problem) have > > the same vacuous ring: Hope Now; Project Lifeline. > > > > Senator Obama has become the in­spiration and role model to > millions > > of children and young people in this coun­try. He has only two > paths > > now: to be a dream maker or a dream killer. > > > > > > Pam Martens worked on Wall Street for 21 years; she has no > securities > > position, long or short, in any company mentioned in this article. > > She writes on public interest issues from New Hampshire. She can be > > reached at pamk741@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! > Search. > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. >