Obama agenda: $29 million raised in January

“President Barack Obama raised more than $29 million for his campaign and for the Democratic Party in January, a strong fundraising month that put him ahead of the pace he set in the last quarter of 2011,” the New York Daily News writes.

"President Obama has outraised the top Republican presidential fundraiser in two-thirds of the country, including battleground states such as Pennsylvania and North Carolina considered crucial to his re-election prospects, a USA TODAY analysis shows. In 19 states, Obama collected more than his four major GOP rivals combined." 

“Republicans hoping to take down both abortion and President Obama in 2012 think they have a winning issue in the debate over ‘personhood,’” the New York Daily News reports. “In several states, new legislation defining human life as beginning at conception - not birth - is being voted on, making it a hot-button social issue a key factor in the election cycle. Just this week, Republican lawmakers in Virginia passed a personhood bill in the key battleground state's House of Delegates. And in Oklahoma, the Senate overwhelmingly gave the green light to a similar plan on Wednesday.”

Discuss this post

A good way to prevent abortion is to prevent unwanted pregnancies, for example, by increasing access to birth control. Just sayin'.

  • 4 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:13 AM EST

Amy,

I heard recently that 98% use some form of birth control now. That sounds like "access" is pretty darn "open" to me. What is needed is more social education regarding sexual activity and its consequences at a reasonably early age in school. Education can be a part of prevention.

  • 2 votes
#1.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:49 AM EST

Oh, my goodness jim, don't you know conservatives don't want sex education in schools? It's "abstinence only" instruction, for these kids. And Catholic Schools are sure as heck not going to teach students about birth control, it is anathema to their theology, hadn't you heard? That's the whole point of the clergy complaining about having insurance cover birth control for those employees who want it. It's against Catholic doctrine to take steps to prevent conception.

  • 3 votes
#1.2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:53 AM EST

Amy, that is simply not true. Furthermore, it doesn't have a DAMN THING TO DO WITH THE ARTICLE Try to stay on topic for a change ! This is merely YOUR attempt to hijacK an article and then take the discussion entirely away from the fact that Obama is focused more on raising funds for his re-election than any real problem facing this country.

  • 2 votes
#1.3 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:48 AM EST

I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one dismayed to realize that all this money is going into campaign warchests on a monthly basis, and we are constantly being yapped at about getting back at the rich.....Mr Obama is also benefitting from the "rich" and I would like to know if the only rich allowed to continue to exist are the ones who have openly supported Obama. 29 million dollars for one month alone.....how many mortgages would that save? How many children would that feed? How many medical procedures would that pay for? I am so tired of the liberals telling me how much they care about me and my family.....absolutely none of their stumbling attempts at stimulus has done one iota of good for me, my family, or anyone else that I know of. Our President wants to slap yet another tax on gasoline, which is costly enough, and it is supposed to go for infrastructure. Wasn't that what the huge loans from the Chinese in stimulus pkgs previously approved were designated for?????? We owe billions and most of us still have potholes and obsolete roadway systems, but we need more taxes to pay for more infrastructure???? What exactly is all this campaign money for???? Telemarketers to run polls that only include people who agree with them? Campaign stickers and bumper stickers? This is a real need in America? I am sure we all know that Mr Obama is running for re-election in 2012. TV commercials which are pretty much offensive to everyone and get old very quickly-millions of dollars for air time that most of us fast forward through thanks to the DVR....When our president travels, it is at taxpayer expense due to the needs of security for a POTUS, so campaign money doesn't fund that.....What the hell is all this money needed for, and why in heaven's name, once the campaigning is over and the election is in the history books, do any of these candidates just get to keep the remainder of the warchest? By the way, none of this stuff is taxed as far as I know for the candidate, so can we please stop screaming about the wealthy not paying their fair share of taxes....what would a fair share of taxes on 29 million look like and how many candidates are out there and how many millions of dollars are in campaign war chests?????

  • 2 votes
#1.4 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 1:51 PM EST

Sue

The Republicans have already spent millions and millions of dollars running attack ads against each other, and you criticize President Obama for raisng money in preparation for the campaign?

Among the 400 wealthiest Americans, 30 of them pay less than 10% of their income in taxes and 101 pay less than 15%. The average tax rate of these wealthiest people is 18.1 %

The average tax rate for upper income folks, those making $200,000 to $500,000 is 19.6 percent. Mitt Romney, who earned 21.7 million dollars last year, paid about 14% of his income in taxes. Do you understand now why folks are concerned that the wealthiest are not paying their share in taxes?

    #1.5 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 4:29 PM EST

    And yet Amy you always forget to tell the other side of the story that nearly 47% of Americans pay ZERO Federal tax...When nearly 1/2 of the population doesn't contribute to the whole pool, well...you get the idea. I believe the tax cuts should end, but that doesn't nearly make up for the ratio of money the Federal government spends versus what it collects...only then will we ever get near balancing the budget, much less paying down the national debt.

      #1.6 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 7:42 PM EST
      Reply

      MSNBC Censors conservative thought.

      It appears the intellectual thought level at MSNBC is in line with the moonbats race baiters like Feisty, Bev, and Pat. Pat Buchanan who worked for the Nixon and Reagan administrations, author of multiple best sellers, loyal husband and father has been fired from MSNBC.

      Why? Because on a daily basis Buchanan would make fools of the left in his on camera commentary and debate with left wing nuts like Lawrence O’Donnell, Rachel Maddow, Mika Brezeznski, Mike Barnicle, and the dozens of other moonbats.

      So, the sole conservative voice is now gone from MSNBC. Oh, but Buchanan is a RACIST like Juan Williams during the PSB censorship lefties will cry. As Michael Jackson once sang….”It really doesn’t matter if your black or white” as long as you sing the progressive tune other wise you need to be eliminated.

      • 5 votes
      Reply#2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:19 AM EST

      Rob, they get their talking points directly from media matters.

      "We don't need no thought control .....".

      • 4 votes
      #2.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:46 AM EST

      rob for a guy who complains as much as you do about MSNBC you sure spend allot of time watching and posting on here.

      buchanan fired? Good! Let him go to faux.

      • 3 votes
      #2.2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:24 AM EST

      Buchanan got fired because of his racist remarks on air and still living back in the 1960's Rob. I know your used to Fox (aka tea people GOP Koch republican propaganda machine) racist remarks daily Rob, but real news shows that kind of talk isn't tolerated.

      • 3 votes
      #2.3 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:46 AM EST

      Actually, they always gave Buchanan a pass. He was like the crazy uncle who showed up daily to rant and rave.

      • 5 votes
      #2.4 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:59 AM EST

      Like Maxine Waters seems to get a pass for every utterance from her uncontrolled mouth ?

      Whatever happened to her ethics investigation ?? Did Eric Holder and the Dems sweep it under the rug ??

      • 3 votes
      #2.5 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:50 AM EST

      MSNBC tried to shut up progressive Cenk Uygar last year about this time as well; big ratings and all. He ended up quitting and letting everyone know how he was told to be less critical of the administration.

      At the same time the ONLY show on Fox I enjoy has been cancelled as well; Judge Napolitano's Freedom Watch. I Guess I'll go back to NEVER watching Fox again.

        #2.6 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:12 PM EST
        Reply

        That is wonderful! Next month we should raise $50 million to send a message to the Tea-baggers!!

        If we can get rid of Joe Scarborough then MSNBC will be completely BLUE!! Yes We Can!!

        President Obama 2012

        • 3 votes
        Reply#3 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:33 AM EST

        And once Republicans know who their candidate will be, mainstream U.S.A. will open their wallets like never before to help offset Obama's $1 billion dollar war chest.

        I wonder if Obama will reveal the sources of his funding THIS TIME !

        • 4 votes
        #3.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:52 AM EST

        Ummm Sorry Jim, When the Republicans figure out which one of these three top Waccos they plan on putting up against Obama, "mainstreet USA" will send him packing, because they know what the Republican agenda REALLY is. The house Republicans have made it very clear that they only care about a select few in this country.

        They like to say that GOP stands for Grand Ol Party

        I say Nay Nay ... It Really Stands for .... Greed Over People.

        Just look at their voting record in the past 2 years... just sayin'

          #3.2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:21 PM EST
          Reply

          Now I cannot wait for all the liberals to wail and holler about Republicans trying to buy the election. Obama's presidency has always been about one thing .... maintaining his power and getting re-elected. For everything else, there is Mastercard when trying to figure out how he's going to pay for everything on his "budget".

          I expect people to attack the Republican Party as being in the hands of Wall Street, while Obama slips out the back door with duffel bags of money.

          • 4 votes
          Reply#4 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:44 AM EST

          Oh, and GOP Presidents haven't tried to "maintain power and get reelected?" It's OK for the GOP to use the MasterCard, but Democrats can't use it? The MasterCard was way over the limit when it was handed to President Obama, and as in any debt, it takes time to pay it off. The constant double standards from the GOP are unbelievable!

          • 1 vote
          #4.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 12:58 PM EST

          Obviously, K2mn .... you have totally shoved your head deep into the sand over Obama's recent budget proposal. It has the same basic disconnect from reality as last year's budget ideas from the President ..... and last year's proposal was voted down something like 97 or 98 to nothing ..... not even a single vote from his own party.

          Every year Obama has been in office, the deficits have been over $1 trillion. Last year it was something like $1.6 trillion and this year's proposal is about a $1.3 trillion deficit while ASSUMING his (Obama's) proposed tax increases go through.

          Obama's predecessor never displayed that much financial insanity, even in his last two years when Democrats controlled the Congress.

          A truly weak argument of attempted comparisons from you !

          • 1 vote
          #4.2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:24 PM EST
          Reply

          Way to go Mr President. We as the people must get you re-elected for the good of the nation and the world.

          Obama / Biden 2012

          • 4 votes
          Reply#5 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:01 AM EST

          The ultra right needs to define life as beginning in the testicle, and that masturbation is murder. Why target women? Men are responsible for the deaths of countless trillions of able bodied semen full of people.

          • 2 votes
          Reply#6 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:28 AM EST

          The article is about Obama's war chest he is trying to raise.

          If I follow your statement and try to change topics, maybe we should discuss the White House and Holder's ongoing attempts to cover up the White House's involment and KNOWLEDGE of the loans to Solyndra !

          Would you rather discuss the article or simply blather in meaningless multiple directions ? We can all play that silly game.

          • 2 votes
          #6.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 11:55 AM EST

          jim-1455434

          You seem to have not read the entire article ... try again

          • 2 votes
          #6.2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 1:08 PM EST

          Read point 6 and tell me where the article speaks about masturbation. Then, it goes into a liberal spin of projecting something totally irrelevant regarding sperm cells.

          Of course, You libbies are focused on the small topics where the real focus is on Obama's obsession with raising funds to get elected.

          • 2 votes
          #6.3 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:31 PM EST
          Reply

          Why is it OK for the GOP to raise millions, but when President Obama raises millions, it's not OK.

          • 2 votes
          Reply#7 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 12:52 PM EST

          K2mn, I have no problem with the President raising millions for his reelection campaign. Further I have no problem with Citizens United that the left is so upset about. What I do have a problem with is the left wingers complaining about how much money Romney is spending in the primary and stating he is buying the nomination. Don't you think that when the President's campaign announced last year that they would need one billion to get reelected isn't about trying to buy the election? BTW, I'm not really upset by Super PACs which the left complained about until Obama's campaign said super pacs were o.k.

          • 2 votes
          #7.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 1:29 PM EST

          I don't believe that raising these massive amounts of money for any side of an election is good for our nation.....I have always thought that we should aggressively pursue reform in the primary process and not allow these huge sums to be collected or stored for any of them. We would avoid special interest groups having potential control and candidates owing gratitude and favors over and above their responsibility to the electorate.

          • 1 vote
          #7.2 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 1:56 PM EST

          Sue

          Please Google Citizens United Supreme Court ruling and understand, the money pouring into the elections this year is the result of the conservative Justices on the bench ruling that campaign money equals free speech.

          • 1 vote
          #7.3 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:06 PM EST
          Reply

          K2M we do not care how much Obama raises!! But DO NOT sit there and tell me that you libbies care about the poor and we do not!! Raise all you want just don't be a hipocrit! Amy, while you're at it telling us to Google Citizens United...Google Media Matters and see what their realtionship is with the WH. Again, don't be a hipocrit. I assure all of you that no conservative wants to get rid of BC. Besides if we did all of you libbies would reproduce and create more drains on the federal govt with entitlement programs. Or you would create more ultra liberal academics that have no clue about what makes this country great!

            Reply#8 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:02 PM EST

            I assure all of you that no conservative wants to get rid of BC.

            Besides the Catholic Church's edicts against birth control, a quick Google search would show you that Rick Santorum and a significant number of other religious extremists want BC banned.

            • 2 votes
            #8.1 - Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:27 PM EST
            Reply
            You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
            As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.