E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe White House today pushed back on accusations that donors to a pro-Obama organization can “buy” access to the president if they’re able to cough up a check for a cool half-million.
“Administration officials routinely interact with outside advocacy organizations, and this has been true in prior administrations, and it is true in this one,” said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney during a lengthy back-and-forth at a daily briefing with reporters.
The New York Times (as well as the L.A. Times) reported that the primary fundraising body supporting the president’s re-election –- now rebooted into an advocacy group called Organizing for Action -- will offer quarterly meetings with Obama for members of its “national advisory board.” The board is expected to be made up of donors who have given at least $500,000 towards OFA’s efforts, the Times reported.
The articles have prompted critics to allege OFA and the White House of participating in a pay-to-play scheme that offers deep-pocketed supporters a direct audience with a president who has publicly decried the influence of money in Washington.
Carney responded that members of outside groups frequently come to the White House to meet with administration officials, including the president.
“There are a variety of rules governing interaction between administration officials and outside groups, and administration officials follow those rules,” Carney said.
Carney also pointed out that Organizing for Action has said that it will disclose its donors and that -- while administration officials may appear at OFA events -- they will not be permitted to raise money for the group.
Leave a Comment:
This guy invited? He is a dem and all.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/25/17088742-new-york-lawmaker-in-hot-water-for-blackface-costume-at-party?lite
As if it is news that Obama is for sale. But liberals will just claim Bush did it, and they use that logic to justify anything Obama does.
I think "Bush's fault" is now being replaced with "Sequester's fault".
Blaming worked for the first 4 years, why change now? :-P
Oh come on, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts already said it was OK! Freedom of speech and freedom to assemble at the White House!
Amy B. Portland, ME - Next it appears corporations will be voting of certain peeps get their way.
so, what is wrong with saying "if you have the cash, I'll listen to you!"?
THe logic will be that bush started it and therefore, obama was forced . Blame anyone but himself. Thats the process...everyone knows it. ! I mean, if we didn't have those big donors,,, how would I fight for the middle class. B as in BS. I am glad all those unemployed minority votes voted for him. Rud tham wound deep with salt. The more the better.
Come on, the first sign Obama put on the door of the Oval Office reads, the buck never stops here.
As usual, the far righties have short memories. Dick Cheney met regularly with energy czars from throughout the country and refused to divulge any minutes of the meetings - citing national security. Funny now the Republicans have a problem with this!
Sanity ( ha)
2 big differences..
1-- Cheney was a VP not the Pres..
2-- Bush and Cheney did not run on Changing the way DC works like Obama did.
Now I have zero problems with people meeting with the prez.. Having to cough up a big check to see him, that I have an issue with.. be it Dem or Repub..
And the left thinks Obama is for the middle class, he is just as bought as any other politician.
Just another birther/Benghazi moment. Idiot rights have no culture and more importantly no brains, I give you Lil Michelle/jollyjoker/Rick/Morgs and Jeremy. Add their IQ's together and you couldn't reach double figures.
I'm sure Obama will find time to meet with them unlike his Job Console commitee, which disbanded due to Obama's lack of interest
Jeremy
Wanna bet?
Look at any Administration from Washington to the present and you'll pretty much find the same sort of thing happening. Those with money get access to power those who don't have money look at power from afar.
Hmmm..., a politician bought is a politician earned...
Argo - wins best picture for story of 6 hostages - being saved in Iran
Corrupt Obama Administration - continues to dodge the truth and accountability for 4 Americans being killed in Benghazi
Ironic - the impotence and incompetence of this floating stink of a president - and his corrupt posse'
Sad and pathetic - BO and Chuckles Biden
Yep, Mr. "Drama" Obama laughed when he said his Stimulus Plan did not have "shovel ready" jobs and cost the American taxpayers about $ 862,000,000,000. Within the Stimulus, a heck of a lot of the money went to HIS political hacks and most of the "Go Green" companies went BANKRUPT.
Now, Mr. "Drama" Obama is still on a roll. He is now GIVING TAXPAYER DOLLARS to HIS FRIENDS:
Looks like Mr. "Drama" Obama is wanting his ObamaCare to FAIL since he is giving out money to a FAILED friend.
The White House should be renamed Chicago II.
The most corrupt and distrusted president in history. No doubt.
This is just totally wrong and contradicts every pledge and principle espoused by Obama. Why would I join any group with a board of rich white guys and led by white guys anyway?
It's ALWAYS ok.....if Obama and the democrats do it. However, it is NEVER ok..... if Bush and the republicans did it. The do as I say , not as I do President.
keen
You talking about the GOP?
Here is the hypocrisy of the left, big corporation is a person only if is a Democrat donor. This nothing new, the left has the gut to criticise the Koch Brothers for donate money to Republicans ,but they have George Soros who has 10 times more money than the Koch but they don't say anything. Hypocrites!!!!!!!
The right needs to realize that this has more than likely been going on through most administrations in the past, regardless of party. The only stupid thing obama did, is the same stupid thing clinton did, he got caught.
You can't point fingers at obama and the democrats when republican presidents have more than likely done it also, after all, government is nothing more than big business, hence is corrupt by nature.
What this does prove though, is that (like I stated above) obama IS just like other presidents aside from the amount of time he spends denying it. This proves that obama IS in the pockets of big business, hence is NOT for the middle class (which most of us already knew).
THAT'S IT..... we can sell Barry to pay off the debt.... brilliant......
Anyone care to buy a elitist dictator for $16 trillion? Buy one now & you'll receive Michelle for free...... plus shipping & handling...... absolutely NO RETURNS ALLOWED
Is anybody surprised Chicago politics are in play?
Obama can be bought just like people can be bought with free contraceptives, gay marriage, etc.
Feeling a bit used today? This president is not clean and I feel like I need a shower.
alex it is your kind of thinking that is ruining this country. Do you NOT understand that Barry ran on transparency and changing the way DC does politics -- he's nothing more than a lying whore who talks out of both sides of his mouth. You lapdogs keep yipping at his heels. Karma's a be-otch and it will land at your feet. ANYONE that thinks this kind of behavior is ok is morally bankrupt, but then only the morally bankrupt voted for this ignorant narcissistic scumbag.
Is a night in the Lincoln bedroom included in that half-mil donation?
Wow, this thread has been open for over 10 minutes and none of the "normal" lefty liberals are jumping to the King's defence.
go figure... LOL
I'm amazed that this story made it to newsvine, actually!
Actually I've been busy reading up on the sequestor. I found a very helpful article by John Schoen on NBC:
I don't like it, won't defend it but this is pretty much par for the course in a post Citizens United world. If you think Romney or any possible 2016 contender will do otherwise, I have a bridge to sell you. One question for the righties, will you join us in supporting a constitutional amendment to get the money out of politics once and for all? Or would you rather just bitch and moan when Obama does it and wink and nod when your side does it?
I will support a constitutional amendment to get money out of politics, as long as lefties support a balanced budget amendment and term limits for members of Congress.
Well Tucson John, this liberal was listening to the GOP House Young Guns line up one by one in front of the microphone to whine that the sequester is all President Obama's fault--never mind they voted for it! Never mind those same Young Guns praised the sequester in 2011.
Al in Visalia CA, well said. I agree, we need a Constitutional Amendment to get money out of politics. If this happened, we wouldn't be discussing the sequester, debt or closing tax loopholes because special interests wouldn't be in the back pockets of our elected officials. Grover Norquist's pledge would be a thing of the past. I don't like so much money in politics either but I do not cricitize President Obama or democrats for doing what he and they had to do to compete in the 2012 election. One side cannot be held to a different set of rules and standards.
Rick, if we had a Constitutional Amendment to get money out of politics, there would be no need for one requiring a balanced budget or term limits because legislators would not longer be obligated to the powerful special interests that keep them from doing what is right.
Heres one liberal's opinion. It sucks. He is just another phony hypocrite pol. No matter which way the political bent swings, it swings for cash.
Stop with the righties and teapublicans and the whatever. This President said he would run the most transparent Oval office ever. All ideas would be out in the open for the public access. Just once could you people be honest and say this sucks and hold him to a higher standard? Very doubtful.
A higher standard, not going to happen. The facts are, wait for it. They all do it. Why should Obama or for that matter be held to any higher standard then Bush or Clinton, or Bush, or Reagan?
This is the kind of story that makes Obama look bad and is hard to defend. Fisty, Bev, and the rest won' touch this one. Seeking did, but I don't think she read the story to completely understand the implications. Seemed to compare Cheney meeting energy czars to Obama meeting whoever has a $500K check. Totally missed the point.
It is out in the open. Transparent as can be. Nothing secretive about it. I view it just as "Al in Visalia CA" and "Jody, Iowa" do. This is post "Citizens United" though. Democrats have to do what they have to do.
The fact that the vast majority of you are perfectly content pointing fingers and insulting each other amply demonstrates that those people have no substantive interest in change. Just because something is within the rules doesn't make it right and if our political parties have to sink deeper into the mud just to compete with each other, then does the process have any further use except enriching the power elite?
Rick says
I'll go along with term limits as long as they aren't overly strict. Part of the problem in CA is that once a legislator learns his way around to really be effective, he gets termed out. Still don't like the idea of career politicians expecting a lifetime job though either. How about a limit of 6 terms in the House, 3 terms in the senate up to a max of 24 years combined?
Sometimes deficits are necessary to stimulate the economy but I agree they should not be standard operating procedure. How about an amendment requiring the President submit a balanced budget and letting whatever congress passes be the budget? That would at least force everyone to keep their eye on balancing the budget and allow for the flexibility needed to address downturns.
No balanced budget amendment no deal. Our government has operated outside its means for far too long with endless promises to reign it in, and yet they never do. There is never a reason outside a declared war that this government should ever have to operate without balancing their budget. Let us not forget that Obama through executive order late this past December gave members of Congress, Federal works, and Joe Biden a raise. No merit required.
Wait, he is for the little people remember.
Obama is and has always been for the little people, when he need their votes. But now that his last election is over, Obama has more flexibility which seems to include democracy for sale.
It's no different than the so called super packs having access to others, like Willard and that guy Scott Walker. All the bitching and moaning coming from the right wing is nothing but FAKE Outrage!!!
It's about time that the President starts having an even playing field.
Just goes to show you, how power will influence even the best politicians...
Lil Michelle, how nice you admit you thought President Obama was better than that...
Power will influence the best politicians. Now that is a good one. Of course the power to sell influence is why they all became politicians. The best politicians, no such thing exists, they are all corrupt.
Amy - I did, and I believed Obama when he said he would end the lobbyist ruling Washington.
Unfortunately, power corrupts... I don't think it is even a choice in Washington. He isn't the first, won't be the last, catering to the rich...
Lil Mich, it is quite an imaginery leap from accepting half-million dollar donations to corruption.
Congress is the government body that can end lobbying in Washington DC by passing a law which President Obama would happily sign. The truth is that until Congress establishes federal funding of all federal elections and/or a Constitutional Amendment removing money from politics, no president can end special interest lobbying. Anyone who says otherwise is naive.
Jody,
no president can end special interest lobbying. Anyone who says otherwise is naive.
Well if that's the case, Obama was being disingenuous when he said he would put an end to lobbyist.
Job1- Level playing field you mean like all the left wing news cuddling him
One could say, totally absent tongue in cheek, this was forced upon the President and the democrats by the SCOTUS, and it would be accurate.
Please stop reporting news like this. My impression of the President is getting better. Typical corrupt politician is a big improvement.
So, what about all the bitching and moaning coming from the left?
Obama needs to stop campaigning....and start leading...
Wishful thinking.
The hypocrite libs hate the rich- unless, of course, they donate a half-million clams to the Campaigner-in-Chief.
Independents are fed up with the excuses and failure of this President, STILL, to refuse to address the out-of-control spending.
He fooled them with his "I'm for a balanced approach of spending cuts and revenues" BS...
He GOT the increased revenues-on the evil "rich" AND everyone else...so where's the spending cuts, Barry?
Bend over, the GOP is gonna make you OWN this one as you should- and your phony rhetoric has worn thin on everyone but your lemming faithful.
you don't have a president...
Once again his highness demonstrates he is a man of the people.
Yes he is, and it will only cost you a half a million for Obama to prove it to you.
I'm glad the media is paying attention to this issue. This is why we have a free press- to shine a light on the relationships between money and political power. Fine with me. Now, if FOX News would just reveal their arrangements with the Republican Party, and the Koch Brothers, we'd be on our way to a cleaner democracy.
Yet little Amy comes from Maine, where her Congressional Representative Chellie Pingree's husband owns every major newspaper in the state. As if the people in Maine get to read anything that doesn't fit liberal ideology.
So what? Sheldon Adelson gave $10 million to Newt Gingrich; then millions more to Mitt Romney--and we're supposed to be alarmed by donors who gave half a million? Sorry, media, but this is hardly breaking news or any kind of news. Until Congress changes the election funding laws and places limits on contributions, one cannot expect democrats to play by a different set of rules than republicans...or vice versa.
Newt is not the President, that was during the campaign - Obama had big money backers in his run as well . The point here ,you give $500,000 you get access to the POTUS. Interesting that only the 1% ers whom Obama loathes would be able to afford this, not his beloved middle class who he fighting so hard for.
So, a presidential candidate and his multi-billion dollar sugar daddy gets a free pass because he lost? Sorry, Celtic, but that dog won't hunt. You cannot excuse one but blame the other because he won.
Right on Celtic!!
@Cat R#10.3- Celtic 1#10.1: Bullsh^t!!!!!!!!!!!!
As usual, Jody...you miss the point.
Obama is now the PRESIDENT, he is not a "candidate"...
There is a difference, ya know...
And some of us, have a problem with it at any level, with any party.
What a hypocrite!
Saving up for a third term? LOL
Amy B Portland ME, I agree with you the media should pay attention to this type of Story. We need to find a way to get money out of politics. Why should someone who can donate have more access than you or me.
.Jill Kelley and Natalie Khawam hosted extravagant parties, they and Paula Broadwelldeserve the chance for a donor pajama party in the Lincoln bedroom at the white house.
now THAT is funny!
Now you're ridiculing General Petraus? That's funny, he's the one Republican I was honestly afraid would run for President, because he couldn't be beat.
Job1,
Good post. I agree completely. Let's let the President go play on a nice level playing field right in the middle of a busy highway.
Hypocrisy should be the President's middle name.
Jody , Iowa
Obama suggested the sequester as a compromise for the credit down grade ...........he signed !!
THEREFORE HE OWNS IT ................Obama handed the axe to the the axe man !! Now the axe man is going to cut his high price buddies out of future donation to the left wing !!
now, you're doing what Obama tells you too? Is he a brilliant politician or what?
Ed Coles, he couldn't have signed it if republicans hadn't voted for it. The Sequester was agreed to by republicans when they turned down $4 trillion in cuts because they refused to raise revenues one dime. The sequester was the poison pill that would force the Super Committee to find compromise. Congress has had 18 months to solve this--why is it the GOPTP House continues to do nothing. Republicans voted for it, they agreed to it. In addition, there would not have been a need for the sequester if the GOPTPers would have compromised but no, they intended to do nothing except hold the country hostage to keep tax cuts for the rich from happening. Speaker Boehner said he got 98% of want he wanted in that 2011 debacle so the GOPTPers own 98% share of it; the blame does not belong solely to President Obama.
Republicans mistakenly thought they would have President Romney so they could freely pick their poison from the sequester.
"Let them eat cake" - Obama
It's good to see that President Obama has evolved on his stance on changing Washington.
LOL - this article attracts a lot of funny people. Funny - in a sad way. Only the get-the-$-out-of-politics ammendment is real but it will never pass until the money is out of politics.
+Peace!
Mr. "Reality" Obama has sold the American public a bill of goods. First, he masquerades as the president for change. Second, he campaigned on change. Third, he has increased spending, failed in reducing the federal debt and will not acquiesce in order to solve the impending financial crisis.
Lack of action will cause a financial meltdown that will cause more damage than the stock market crash in the 30's
Jody
It's never solely the presidents fault unless the left wants to blame one of the last presidents. The fact is Obama could have refused to sign the legislation ...........if this was such a bad idea , why would Obama sign, because Boener says he could 98% of what he wanted !!!........then hell this 2% shouldn't sweat Obama ............right
But the Prez , and the left wants the public to believe the " SKY Is Falling "
Transparency
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdX5dSlLaYg
Again the Conservemyturds, also known as @!$%# for Brains, come here to bash this Pres. for doing exactly what past Pres.'s have done? Par for their course! Pull your heads out of the Tea Potty Peoples asses, would you, just for once? Its just sooooooooooooooooooooo tiring to hear the same ol whinning from you righties!
Get your congressman/woman to get money out of politics if you care so much about this now, and not when bushies tushy did it!
Freakin Hypocrites!!!
The DIFFERENCE, Mr. @!$%# for Brains...
is that YOUR President (I will not say that he is mine...) CAMPAIGNED to be different, and CHANGE this sort of crap.
Remember, that HOPEY, CHANGEY, thing?
SO...when Obama fails to live up to his promises, you defend him, by saying "past Presidents have done it"?
Really?
Sounds to me like YOU'RE the hypocrite, D.
dfromspencer when you talk like that you prove you are an idiot and no one is listening!
Yes, finally. I am sick an tired of hearing about past presidents did this and did that. Obama uses this as an excuse for doing the samething he bashes them for.
Plus the DEMOCRATE sheep on this web site keep spewing the same taking points. Bush's wars not paid for, fast and furious that was bush, etc........
I thought the rich were evil. Why does Obama want to meet with them?
They are looking for the same deal facebook got make a billion don't pay any taxes then collect half a million. They must be meeting Obama in the Chicago bath house for that kind of deal