Israeli Foolhardiness .

Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is considering attacking Iran  at America's expense .

The story that could dominate the NEWS is likely the threat of an Israeli attack against Iran . You have that gut feeling . You wake up in the morning , turn the TV on and see parts of Iran being bombed. The scare of a nuclear Iran is extremely benign , but the facts about it are mostly distracted  by the Israeli government . Before the United States invaded Iraq , most of the faulty intelligence regarding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction came from  Israel. It was also Israel that pushed for an Iraqi invasion . Now Israel is again making an outlandish treat that could further quagmire the United States into a costly war that has no basis Suddenly the Israeli press has become fixated on stories that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is considering a military attack on the Iranian nuclear program. Some very reputable Israeli journalists are reporting that the prime minister and his defense minister, Ehud Barak, are pushing the cabinet to vote in favor of an attack. An Israeli strike on Iran could create a firestorm of violence from the Mediterranean to the Arabian Sea and put thousands of American soldiers and diplomats at risk. Today Israel tested one of its long-range missiles, adding to the tension. In recent days, speculation in Israel has grown about the possibility of a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, with Haaretz newspaper reporting that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak were seeking cabinet support for an attack.On Sunday, Haaretz reported that US officials had failed to secure a commitment from Israel that it would coordinate any attack plans with Washington.And the military last week carried out what Israeli media called a "ballistic missile" test, as well as a large-scale civil defence drill simulating the response to conventional and non-conventional missile attacks..An Israeli provocation could also inspire many end-time buffs that could set off a new Middle -East war , if that's not bad enough , the sneaky Israeli leaders could also 'wash' their hands of it and pass the new war to the United States which is committed to Israel . The whole Israeli press hullabaloo may be just a media invention or some trial balloon that will fade away. The Obama team could also quietly make clear to Bibi that a strike is a bad idea. Sanctions and sabotage have slowed Iran’s nuclear program down considerably. The former head of the Mossad has publicly urged continued diplomacy and covert action to keep Iran from getting the bomb. Meir Dagan has said an Israeli attack would be a “stupid idea.” He is right..

Congress & God................

God is worried about the American economy , but he is concerned on how Congress spends it's time .

Congress ( **** ) has time to debate , and time to "reaffirm" : (1) ' In God we Trust'  . Unemployment is at 9 percent, about 50 percent higher than what we used to consider a national crisis. The national debt is at $14 trillion, (approaching 15 Trillion as of this writing )   ( 2 ) but that's as of Thursday afternoon, so don't hold me to that number. The national budget year started a month ago, but a budget is somewhere in the pile of things that Congress, with a record-low 109 House of Representatives work days this year, somehow can't manage to consider. But fortunately, on Wednesday, the House found time to debate and pass a bill declaring the national motto to be "In God We Trust." It passed 396-9, though God doesn't even have a political action committee. Admittedly, there are groups claiming to be God's political action committee, but so far none have produced their client for a news conference. What's curious about the action is that "In God We Trust" already is the national motto, and has been since 1956. You can find it on the money, and everything -- although maybe the House is worried that people now have so little money they've forgotten. House members said they wanted to reaffirm the national motto, although that's already been done, too, in 2002. And in 2006, the Senate voted, all by itself, to reaffirm "the concept embodied in the motto." This week's motto moment did give several members the chance to offer the almighty their personal endorsement. "Is God God? Or is man God? In God do we trust, or in man do we trust?" asked Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. Unless we're clear on that, he suggested, "we should just let anarchy prevail because, after all, we are just worm food. So indeed we have the time to reaffirm that God is God and in God do we trust." So the House got that straightened out. Still, you might wonder why this came up now, whether the nation faced a sudden motto shortfall, like the repeated financial crises requiring Congress to pass continuing resolutions to keep the government in business. It was more serious than that. "Unfortunately, we've had a number of key public officials who -- even after the 2002 vote -- apparently were confused about what the national motto was," indignantly explained Rep. J. Randy Forbes, R-Va. Specifically, in November 2010, President Obama, told a crowd in Jakarta, Indonesia, "In the United States, our motto is E pluribus unum -- out of many, one." The phrase is also on the money, and on the Great Seal of the United States, and was proposed as the motto by Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin, but is not, at least since 1956, the national motto. Congressmen leaped to face the emergency created by the president's comment. In December, 42 House members wrote the president seeking a correction. In March, the Congressional Prayer Caucus officially demanded a retraction, but somehow it didn't rise to the top of the White House to-do list. So this week, a year afterward -- if the mills of the gods grind slowly, they have nothing on Congress -- the House debated and affirmed that the national motto is "In God We Trust."Thus far, God has had no comment. "I suspect if the almighty had something to say, it wouldn't be pretty," said Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore. "It's hard to think of a better metaphor for why nothing's happening, how we're filling up time, picking up absolutely pointless issues." But Thursday, Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, explained on Fox News that the whole effort had been worth it to "remind the president what the motto of our great country is." So the core mission of the House of Representatives these days is to say to the president, "Nyah nyah." Still, Forbes sees a vital point to "In God We Trust" getting a renewed House OK. In these economic times, he explained, "Our citizens need that kind of hope, and that kind of inspiration." So there's a deeper message to the House urging people to trust in God. The members are reminding Americans not to count on Congress.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

****

At least we are clear that the House trusts God. It is fitting, because almost nobody in the country trusts the House.

I like to imagine when, sometime in the future, members of House find themselves at the Pearly Gates in front of St. Pete. I expect there will be statement to each, reminiscent of the immortal words of Ricky Ricardo, "Lucy, you've got some explaining to do.

(1) The phrase 'In God We Trust' first appeared on U.S. coins during the Civil War in 1864. .  (2) Yes, this is how Congress spends it's time. Re-affirming something that is already in place. Anything to avoid the real problems.

CAIN'S PAIN

Herman Cain has just given the GOP a problem. For me to see something like this is  like kicking the wall,  all because   I want to see African -Americans be part of a political process . Here a man of African decent  is brought down by dirt dug up perhaps by the White Media ? ****.A scandal like this could hurt the rest of the GOP candidates .Mark Block and Linda Hanson, two top campaign aides in Herman Cain's presidential bid, have embroiled the GOP hopeful in yet another scandal, this time one involving corruption, with violations of both election law and federal tax law suspected through conservative groups like Prosperity USA

No Quarter (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) broke the story Oct. 30, which was swallowed up in the fervor over accusations of sexual harassment. Now, however, news of illegal corporate funding has begun to be picked up by blogs and local news sources on Oct. 31, and may be yet another "cloud" cast over Cain's 2012 presidential campaign .Conservatives almost immediately denounced the story as a "high-tech lynching," the same phrase Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. (see Notes & Comments )

Hanson and Block, the campaign manager now infamous for the "Cain smoking ad" that went viral last week, ran a private Wisconsin-based corporation that footed the bill for thousands of dollars in iPods, chartered flights and other expenses that helped their candidate get his campaign off the ground--something that internal sources and legal documents indicate might breach both federal tax and campaign laws in the United States.Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is offering the embattled Herman Cain some advice in the sexual harassment settlement fallout — don’t pull the race card. Good words of wisdom, but the train has already left the station in this mess. Herman Cain and his team bungled this terribly. He said the attacks on him are racially motivated. Really? How about the scandals that torpedoed presidential aspirations of John Kerry and Michael Dukakis?If this is how he handles a controversy as a private figure, imagine what he would do as president of the U.S.A. Some on the right claim this is a high-tech lynching and a throwback to Clarence Thomas’ sexual harassment scandal that came to a head during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings, when we saw his accuser, Anita Hill, grilled by the Senate. To Herman Cain and people like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, you can pull the race card when it convenient to you. That will certainly backfire.

It is quite evident that Herman Cain’s meteoric rise in the polls is being reduced to nothing more than a national joke. He should have known that his “little secret” would come to light at some point. Either he is narcissistic or just plain arrogant into thinking he could have pulled this off without the press getting wind of two sexual harassment settlements in his past. The reality is that stonewalling, semantic denials, hurling accusations of a smear job, partial explanations, that we can clearly see through and using weasel words to steer clear of the conversation, won’t make the questions or this mess go away.

What will be equally damning is if the accuser, who is rearing to come forward, is a white woman. Herman Cain would have diminished his stature even more, by embodying that stereotype of black men fawning over white women.  The reality is that this scandal really magnifies the political naivete of Herman Cain and shows us quite clearly, he isn’t ready for the White House, not by any stretch of the imaginatio

 _________________

NOTES & COMMENTS:

****  There has not been any African -Americans who has risen to a predominant office in American  Politics other than Barak Obama  . Dr. Martin Luther King rallied the masses in the 1960's for change , at that time he could not aspire to politics  .  Jesse Jackson tried it and failed . I have to give credit to Condoleezza Rice is an American political scientist and diplomat. Clarence Thomas. has been recently compared to Cain  , I see that Thomas survived on the Supreme Court Bench . Cain however is damaged .

Gov. Brown's Pension plan .

Gov. Brown tackles "Pension Reform" with a script from a former Governator.

Well Gov. Brown is jumping the gun on pension  reform . State workers won't be able to retire until there 57 . I have to argue , it seems to me that the Government does not want YOU to retire until your 80 years old , and YOU won't get the money you'd worked for all your life . It's simple as that. The state is broke , and your money is the CAUSE of the PROBLEM. Tell me has any one you know retired at 57 years old ?,  who works for the state as an 'average' joe de-plumber type of person . MOST of the state workers who do retire at 57 seem to me to be those making over 100,000 dollars , you'll never find a 40,000 a year person on salary retiring at 57 . Gov. Brown's plan hackles its way down to those making 40,000 a year . Yes' the average joe ! . It's seems that the Federal Government wants you to retire much (much much much ) later .We are told, with good reason, that the current pension system for public workers in California is unsustainable. But many of the reforms may be unsustainable too. But there’s a problem at its core: Brown’s plan – like most other pension reforms in California – would create a two-tiered pension system. Jerry Brown plan is just one of those contra NEW DEALS to take your retirement money away .a 12-Point Pension Reform Plan (pdf). Initial reviews from labor: thumbs down.Under the proposal, new state workers would move to a hybrid system combining guaranteed benefits with a 401K-style. It would also raise the retirement age from 55 to 67 and require that both new and existing employees pay at least 50 percent of the annual cost of their pension benefits. Brown said today he wants to put the plan before voters in November, 2012.

Analysis from KQED Sacramento Bureau Chief John Myers:

Brown's proposal is obviously only a starting point for negotiations with the Legislature. And from the sound of things so far, it's a tough sell with the state's politically powerful labor unions. In particular, his proposal for a hybrid system combining traditional pension benefits with a 401(k) style package is drawing fire.
The real question may be whether this plan is enough to solve the funding woes of the state's two pension funds. The governor's own advisers told reporters today that while the proposal offers "opportunities" to downsize the so-called 'unfunded liability' of CalPERS and CalSTRS, it does not guarantee that those pension funds will be able to get out of the long-term hole they're in. Instead, advisers say it'll keep the hole from getting deeper.
And that's going to be a tough sell to those most adamant that government roll back pension benefits -- not just for future workers, but for current workers who've yet to retire. In other words... this proposal is, for now, getting hit from all corners.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

According to a new report, many Americans will have to work into their 80s before being able to retire. The lower your income, the longer you’ll have to work. Those making 11,700 or less, will have a 50% chance of retiring by 84. Those making $72,500 and up will have a 50 percent chance of retiring at age 65.Congressmen don't make much money? You got to frickin kidding me, look up what their salaries... you'll find six figure digits for most of them, along with Cadillac insurance plans, guaranteed retirement after 1 term of office.Now if you look at state reps and senators yes they don't make much money but federal elected officials bank roll off of our money. Research...

Tax & More Tax = Jobs to China !

       

The Overburden of Tax on the American citizen is vary extreme from state to state . Americans seemed to be TAXED more and more since the 1930's . We now assume that the Democrats are the 'Tax and spend liberals" , while the Republicans are the Party of NO TAX. However that took a dive with both pizza mogul Herman Cain, and his competitor for the Tea Party vote Texan governor Rick Perry. Yes they want to TAX you some more with some outlandish tax law changes . Both men have proposed, as their keystone economic strategies, variants of the flat tax idea. Cain has proposed the “9-9-9″ plan, calling for a nine per cent sales tax, a nine per cent business tax, and a nine per cent flat tax, while Perry has proposed a 20 per cent flat tax which would be opt-in . Broadly, both these plans hinge on the argument that the American tax system is both overly complicated (having, as ours does, income tax bands) and unfair (because rich people should pay the same percentage of tax as the poor), but as Syracuse University Professor Leonard Burman said on Radio 5 last night, it is more complex than it sounds:.

“A flat tax is just a kind of VAT where the wage part of the tax is payed by workers and the basic idea is that you do that so that you can allow an exemption so that it’s not quite as regressive as a sales tax is, whereas a sales tax would be overall.
“The wrinkle in Rick Perry’s plan is that he allows the option of paying tax under our old complicated income tax for people who like that better. The concern a lot of us have is that a flat tax is regressive, kind of unfair, it’s a huge tax cut for high income people…
“[It's regressive because] it’s basically a sales tax, and while we can think of it as a wage tax and a cash-flow tax on businesses, but, y’know, if you look at wages for high-income people, wages are half of their income, for low income people its all of their income.
“If you look at spending, high income people spend only a fraction of their income because they’re rich enough to be able to save most of it, low income people spend all of their income, so both Herman Cain’s sales tax/flat tax – Herman Cain’s plan is really a hodgepodge, it’s actually three different kinds of sales taxes labelled as an income tax and a business tax and a sales tax, I think he figured out that calling it a 999 plan would be saleable than calling it a 25% sales tax, which is actually what it is.

“Cain’s plan at least has the advantage that it could plausibly pay for the government, because it’s got a very very broad base and a pretty high tax rate. The problem with Perry’s plan is that it would produce enormous deficits.
“High income people would all choose the option of paying 20 per cent wage tax rather than the 35 per cent that they pay now on all of their income including interest and dividends, and other capital income, so it’s fiscally irresponsible.
“It’s actually more complicated than the current system, because you have to choose between the new flat tax and the old complicated income tax, and from my perspective at least it’s really unfair because it would produce huge tax cuts for high income people. That’s not really our biggest problem right now, that high income people pay too much tax.”

 Perry’s plan is torn apart by Jared Bernstein, a member of Obama’s economic team, who argues that it only makes sense if you believe the following things are the problems with America’s tax system:

• The tax code is too simple;
• Rich people need more after-tax income;
• There’s too much retirement security in America;
• Multinationals aren’t creating enough jobs abroad.

These problems pale in comparison to those of Herman Cain’s, however. Yes, Perry’s will probably bankrupt America, but for Cain, a picture is worth a thousand words.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
JOBS TO CHINA.

 Anti-Suicide NETS at a i Phone &I pad manufacturing plant in China .

With all his "Genius" Steve Jobs provided an Anti-American feel to the  Jobs Market that's been reeling because of Obama's record of 9.1 % four year record of no-action . Mr. Jobs sent work to China , YES work that could have done here and MADE in the USA. APPLE with it's net worth of 74 billion still has sweatshops in China where they make iPad and iPhone products for a fraction of the cost that an American factory could produce them for. The working conditions were so deplorable that people were jumping out of the factory windows and killing themselves. Steve Jobs response wasn't to improve working conditions, but rather to install suicide safety nets to prevent the suicide jumpers from falling to their death.The iPhone was estimated to cost $130 to make (when Apple was charging over $800 for it) and probably costs even less than that. Apple had more than enough revenues and profits to manufacture the phone in the U.S. Because more and more companies like Apple only want bigger profits even when they have more than enough revenues, there are a growing number of impoverished areas expanding in America. It would be just as cost-effective to manufacture Apple products in the U.S. and save on massive international shipping costs, export of the right equipment, protection of patents, etc, than send over 500,000 jobs overseas. This is what is now called  the NEW capitalism, no businesses care about America, they only care that Americans buy they products and that the powerful Americans in suits lower the corporate tax rate. This is the "great" thing about capitalism isn't it? You get to buy what you want but you don't get to make it. 

NOTES& COMMENTS:

Increasing attention has been paid to the sharp increase in suicides this year at Foxconn's Shenzhen factory which manufactures iPods, iPads, and iPhones. It also fills orders from a broad list of clientele including Dell, HP, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony.  With at least one employee dying from exhaustion as well, the pressure is on for Foxconn and its Taiwanese owner Hon Hai Precision Industry Ltd. to enact changes.

Blame Congress......................

 With all time Low Ratings how can anything get done in Washington D.C. ? Bickering , and the inability  for compromise is destroying the Government.

Let's imagine that in the future .........not far off.   That we either have  **both houses of congress dominated with Democrats , or Republicans . If the Republicans/ Democrats  win all the seats and the Presidency . America would turn into a one Party state all by the virtue of the free election process . The balance of power would shift left or right . For years there has been a saying that to change any thing we need to Cross party lines. Vote against the incumbents, all of them, every time., the people don't always get what they want--but--in most cases get what they deserve--we are on the verge of paying the price for stupidity that came into existence in 1973. It's a shame that both houses in Congress can't get anything done for the people because both of the parties have been sold out to the RICHEST conglomerate that can buy the congress and influence the VOTE and PASS laws . Yes, both parties of the House and Senate have been sold out to lobbyists .  Whether if they be UNIONS or CORPORATIONS  . The power of the Voter has been weakened to some extent as such that before all American eyes , every American has been TAXED with out Representation .Here is an 'example'.

Bank of America and several smaller banks recently announced new monthly fees for customers who use debit cards. The move prompted howls of protest, including from Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), who took to the Senate floor to encourage customers to remove their money from banks that raise fees.
That a sitting senator would encourage a bank run, especially in this economy, is remarkable - and an indication of the political heat generated by the fees. So let's see if we can shed some light on how to think about them
No customer wants to pay new fees for any product or service he already receives. So why are these banks taking the unpopular step and dinging their customers $3, $4, or $5 a month?
It's important to note that not everyone can say he didn't see it coming - least of all Durbin.
When Congress pushed through its big financial reform package last year, it included price controls on the so-called "swipe fees" banks can charge merchants for the use of debit cards in retail transactions. These fees are one way that banks make money. And they had nothing to do with the crisis that triggered the financial reform measure.
So why did Congress include these price caps? Because Durbin and other supporters of the measure were aiming to help friends in the retail industry who don't like paying the fees.
Before the law passed, the banks warned Durbin that the swipe-fee controls would likely lead them to raise prices for other services. But the caps passed anyway. And so banks have done exactly as they said they would do: They raised fees elsewhere to make up for the lost revenue, estimated at more than $6 billion.
Banks are not the most popular institutions these days, but they can hardly be faulted for raising fees in one area of their business after Congress imposed price caps in another.
This is not the first time Washington has experimented with price controls to ill effect. Policymakers also advanced price controls to regulate the airline, telecommunications, and trucking industries, among others. In the 1970s, the Nixon administration imposed caps on gasoline prices, which led to shortages, long lines at filling stations, and outrage.
Price controls are one of the most pernicious kinds of government regulation. In an ironic twist, they often lead to higher consumer prices over time, because they build inefficiencies into economic transactions and decision-making that end up costing consumers more in the long run.
Policymakers largely abandoned price controls after the painful experiences of the 1970s. But it looks as if we're repeating the mistakes of the '70s all over again. The public ire should be directed, as it was back then, at the Washington policymakers interfering with the market.
The good news is that a bipartisan effort is channeling some of the outrage in a productive manner. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah) and Rep. Bill Owens (D., N.Y.) have sponsored legislation to repeal the price controls.
But they face an uphill battle. Large retailers like the price caps. And some policymakers see banks as a convenient villain. If the price controls remain, the loser will be he average bank customer, who will likely see less innovation, worse service, and higher prices over time.

NOTES& COMMENTS:

The blame rests solely on Congress since they are the ones with the lawful power to enact the laws and support the rules. What has Congress done? In 1913 with the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act, Congress created the banker's dream and abrogated its responsibility to preserve the value of our money. The Federal Reserve is not part of the federal government at all; rather it is owned and operated by the member banks and rigidly controlled by the major players in the banking industry. Every decision and action made by the Federal Reserve has been to benefit its members at the expense of the American wage earner, saver, and retiree.Additionally, Congress enacted the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 which repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act which prohibited banks from owning other financial companies. This allowed banks to also operate in other financial arenas like insurance and investments so that banks could take more risk in the hope of earning higher returns. Congress also enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002 which increased regulations and federal oversight on all publicly held companies and many privately held companies. In 2010 Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act which altered federal regulation and oversight for virtually every aspect of financial operations in both the private and public sector. Each of those laws contributed to making it more difficult for businesses to be competitive, especially small businesses. These acts of Congress need to be repealed or seriously scaled back before our economy gets going again . We need and deserve Congressmen who have the knowledge to understand the problems and have the courage to do what is right for the nation rather than simply agree to what is politically expedient. We do not need the self-serving, career politicians our current system attracts; we need real patriots to serve us! November 2012 is another opportunity to elect citizen-leaders who will faithfully serve those who elected them rather than continue the same old game of confiscating wealth from those who earned it and transferring that wealth to those who did not..

**A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 46% of Likely U.S. Voters now view most members of Congress as corrupt. Thats up seven points from June and the highest finding yet recorded.  Just 29% think most members are not corrupt, and another 25% are not sure. Similarly, a whopping 85% of voters think most members of Congress are more interested in helping their own careers than in helping other people. Thats a record high for surveys stretching back to early November 2006.  Only seven percent (7%) believe most of the legislators are more interested in helping others.

CONTACT CONGRESS LET THEM KNOW :

http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Occupying America

Remember these people marching are Marxists and Communists! 

Whoever sits in the White House will have to contend with the 'Occupy Wall Street' and the 'Tea Party' together protesting the ever worse economic conditions . These protests are all on the same lines of thought . No Taxes , More Jobs , Immigration , Fairness, cut Spending , get out of Iraq  & Afghanistan . Any one who thinks that any of these Tea Party People are any different than the wild or almost hippie like Occupiers are wrong . Glenn Beck said that the Occupy movement is made up of Marxists jocks , I disagree with Beck . May be he needs to go to one of the these Occupy protests and hear what they are saying then go to one of the Tea Party gatherings , and Lo! we have a connection . These two groups are Fed Up with how things are running . Protesting the Banks , Wall Street is not just an option but I see the sense of it . Since Washington Bailed out the Banks with trillions of Tax payer money to save them from collapsing into a depression like state . The  *****Kind Banks returned to their original practice of foreclosing on homeowners pushing people out of their homes . The Big  ( Business ) billionaires who could create jobs here in America , and mind you as I rant here . They just packed up their Big Businesses and off-shored  a host of jobs overseas , all because they don't want to pay and American a decent  wage .  I would have to say WAKE AMERICA , maybe we all need to protest and GET the American dream back .The Beginning Is Near! proclaimed one early sign at New York City’s Liberty Plaza, which since September 17 has been held by a coalition of activists under the Occupy Wall Street banner. In the early days of the action, many on the professional left doubted that Occupy Wall Street would be the beginning of anything. “Another day, another demo…” some shrugged, weary from years of protests that never seem to stop another war, another robbery of the poor by the rich. In Washington, for two frustrating years, the debate has been focused on how much austerity to have—the slash-and-burn policies of the Republican Party or the austerity-lite measures of President Obama. (  $ )More stimulus, we were told, was a nonstarter. Hope seemed a distant, perhaps false, memory .But what does Occupy Wall Street want? Whether with condescension or curiosity, that is the question being posed to the young people whose brilliant act of symbolic politics has landed them in the spotlight. Wisely, they are taking their time answering it. So far they have put out only one statement, which isn’t a list of demands so much as an indictment of the corporate state: “We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments.”.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

*****Goldman Sachs alone in 2010 gave John Boehner $100,000.00.
What did they get for that kind of money? Read on.
"Banks are mobilising a smooth-running lobbying machine in Washington to ­battle Barack Obama's plans to limit the size and scope of Wall Street institutions, as financial services firms gear up to stop a shake-up that could slice away large chunks of their operations.Their influence on Capitol Hill is broad – the top eight US banks spent $26m (£16m) on lobbying efforts last year, an increase of 6% on 2008 despite their financial woes, according to Congressional records. And in the first 10 months of 2009, the financial industry donated $78.2m to federal candidates and party committees – more than any other business sector – according to political research institute the Centre for Responsive Politics." Banks are mobilising a smooth-running lobbying machine in Washington to ­battle Barack Obama's plans to limit the size and scope of Wall Street institutions, as financial services firms gear up to stop a shake-up that could slice away large chunks of their operations. Their influence on Capitol Hill is broad – the top eight US banks spent $26m (£16m) on lobbying efforts last year, an increase of 6% on 2008 despite their financial woes, according to Congressional records. And in the first 10 months of 2009, the financial industry donated $78.2m to federal candidates and party committees – more than any other business sector –

($) President Obama : announced plans to give away billions of dollars to alternative energy companies, the lobbyists came running toward Washington.

Billionaire entrepreneurs T. Boone Pickens and Ted Turner were just the latest to make the trip. The duo delivered a joint talk in the capital city Tuesday about their alternative energy investments, and both made it clear they were there looking for handouts.

For the past three years, legendary oilman T. Boone Pickens has crossed the country selling a plan to eliminate America’s reliance on foreign energy sources through domestic natural gas production and wind energy.

He just needs $5 billion of your dollars to do it.

“This is all the help I want. I want a billion dollars a year for five years and then kill it,” Pickens said, describing the amount of public money he’ll need through tax credits to get his plan off the ground. “Five billion dollars.”

More specifically, Pickens is busy lobbying for a bill — HR 1380 — which is currently sitting in committee and if passed would provide the billions he’s requesting. Sponsored by Oklahoma Republican Rep. John Sullivan, the legislation would change the Internal Revenue Code to give tax credits to entrepreneurs like Pickens who invest in the renewable energy business.