Hillary’s Pollster Got Millions in Stimulus Funds
Posted by
Mark Noonan
in
Obama Administration on
December 9th, 2009 at 07:25pm with
18 responses.
Tags: Democrat Culture of Corruption.
Tags: Democrat Culture of Corruption.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
Entirely unsurprising:
A contract worth nearly $6 million in stimulus funds was awarded by the Obama administration to two firms run by Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton’s pollster in 2008.
Why? Because Penn is connected and Hillary had debts and when liberals are in charge they don’t think of taxpayer funds as being the property of the taxpayers.
As I’ve said before, once we pull the lid off this Administration, I bet we’ll find it to be the most relentlessly corrupt in history.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
18 Responses to “Hillary’s Pollster Got Millions in Stimulus Funds”
Caucus of Corruption
From the featured link: GOP Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Tom Coburn (Okla.) held a news conference Tuesday to blast 100 “wasteful” projects funded by the $787 billion economic stimulus package Congress passed earlier this year, concluding that at least $7 billion of the $217 billion spent through November was wasteful and mismanaged.
$7 billion of the $217 billion (3.2%) spent through November was, according to Sens of the opposition party, wasteful you say? OMG!! I hope they weren’t looking all that hard.
HMMMMM
Penn received scrutiny during and after the 2008 presidential campaign for the role he played in Clinton’s unsuccessful White House bid. Some Clinton supporters questioned whether his service was worth the millions in fees he billed to the campaign.
Penn’s firm billed the campaign $5 million for polling and at least $8 million for sending out direct-mail pieces, according to Time magazine.
Clinton’s campaign finally paid off the debt in July.( with taxpayers stimulus money?)
Ha Ha Ha
The State University of New York at Buffalo won $390,000 to study young adults who drink malt liquor and smoke marijuana.
I could answer that, I hung out there in the late 60’s and early 70’s with many many fond (and foggy ) memories.
………………………………
The National Institutes of Health got $219,000 in funds to study whether female college students are more likely to “hook up” after drinking alcohol.
DUHHHHH, stupid is as stupid is …see above..LOL
is = does
Sadie,
That is supposed to make us happier? And we’re supposed to believe it?
Ricorun,
$7 billion might be unimportant to you, but its rather important to the rest of us. Its $7 billion more borrowed from the grand kids.
Mark: $7 billion might be unimportant to you, but its rather important to the rest of us. Its $7 billion more borrowed from the grand kids.
How do you think the compensation of Fortune 500 companies might affect your grandkids? At various times I’ve heard it reported that if compensation to top executives in such companies were considered part of their respective company’s profits (rather than an expense), reported corporate profits would be somewhere between 25 and 50% higher. Considering the Fortune 500 companies, in aggregate, averaged approx $450 billion/yr in earnings over the last decade, that works out to between $110 and $225 billion in executive compensation per year. And again, that’s just the Fortune 500. Consider the implications of that on your grandkids while you insist on deregulation.
Whereas those Fortune 500 companies could surely recruit equally skilled and successful officers if they paid significantly less. They must not have a good reason to pay those salaries and bonuses—after all, it makes complete sense to spend “between $110 and $450 billion PER YEAR when they could achieve the same levels of success on, say, maybe just $500 million. How much does rico deem appropriate compensation for these exectives?
After all, it’s not as if these execs would take their skills to other countries or even to smaller companies not “regulated” as stringently as these Fortune 500 companies.
And what could be more American than having the government interfere in private enterprise?
What a great idea, rico. There may be a czar position open for you………
ricorun,
Money made by corporations is not borrowed from the grand kids. You’re getting quite pointlessly partisan these days…
ricorun, Money made by corporations is not borrowed from the grand kids. You’re getting quite pointlessly partisan these days…
Pointlessly something, that’s for sure. At least lately he’s been doing it with fewer words.
rico is of the belief that a corporation’s profit is theft from the populace.
Typical collectivist thinking.
Collectivism, in any of its forms, is the enemy of freedom and liberty. – “Buck” Compton.
You’re right Mark that money paid to those execs isn’t borrowed from future generations it’s stolen from them today.
I’m surprised you take Amazona to task for supporting high pay for executives who don’t “make, mine and grow” things.
The snake is starting to think the tail looks very tasty!
sadieforker
I’m surprised you take Amazona to task for supporting high pay for executives who don’t “make, mine and grow” things.
Yeah Sam Walton produced nothing right?
what commie MORONS.
Rico
so how much should a company pay it’s ceo.
The corp I worked for was a 40 BILLION $ a YEAR enterprise?
so how much more does a captain of a huge ship make compared to a buss boy?
or a 747 pilot than a carpet cleaner?
Oh yeah the “GREEDY” corp exects.
Sadie,
Its not stolen from anyone – even the pornographer is not stealing his money. If someone volunteers to pay for something, it isn’t theft…and if the boss of the corporation rewards himself with even billions out of the proceeds of those voluntary purchases, he hasn’t stolen. Whether it is right for him to do so is a matter of judgment – I think he shouldn’t, but I cannot command him thus, and no one should be able to do so, lest all our freedoms be eroded.
“You’re right Mark that money paid to those execs isn’t borrowed from future generations it’s stolen from them today.”
I wonder of any of those leftists are considered among the theives. Somehow I think not.
sadie, is just another useful idiot collectivist, there is no need to say any more. Oh, that’s right, those from the pitchfork are the “collective” according to the individual who believes he/she is a bubble-memory computer.
What losers.
Who’s the real thief?
An executive who receives a huge bonus from funds taken from VOLUNTARY purchases of products or services by individuals.
OR
An over-reaching imperialist federal government who threatens incarceration if their wealth redistribution schemes are not funded by excessive taxation of a small portion of the country’s population?
You know what would really be cool? If we put a ceiling on what private enterprise executives make, say $500,000 a year, and then put a floor under them as well, so none could make less that, oh, I don’t know—$450,000? Wouldn’t that really level the old playing field?
And of course none of this could depend on productivity. I mean, taking money for being better at something than someone else is sounds like theft. Maybe the difference between the upper and lower level could be decided much like the Nobel Peace Prize is—on intentions.
Applicants could write an essay on what they WISH they could bring to the company–no deductions for spelling or Rogue Apostrophes, as that might damage some self-esteem.
The problem is, with business, the worker would not make as much as the CEO—that’s not fair, either. But a little tweaking of the Minimum Wage law should fix that.
I’d apply this to sports, too. Why should some football player get paid more than some other football player? That’s just not fair.
It does sound like a Brave New World, doesn’t it?
Tired, I think you nailed it in your last post. Kudos…….