May 18, 2012

Pushing back the billionaire who was going to spend $10 million on ads linking Obama to Jeremiah Wright.

Joe Ricketts got a quick political education:
Liberal groups encouraged like-minded investors to drop their accounts with TD Ameritrade, the brokerage firm Mr. Ricketts founded. His family’s plan to seek public financing for improvements to Wrigley Field, home of their baseball team, the Chicago Cubs, ran into new political opposition. And he was forced to write a letter to reporters at his New York news organization, DNAinfo.com, assuring them he believed that “my personal politics should have absolutely no impact on your work.”

By early afternoon, Mr. Ricketts had announced that he had rejected the ad campaign as out of keeping with his own political style, a day after his aides indicated that it was still under consideration.
In the speech marketplace, and money is a medium of expression. The rich have an advantage... and a vulnerability.
The episode all but ensured that Republicans would remain under intense pressure not to invoke Mr. Wright’s provocative statements so directly for the balance of the campaign. And, in a year when the loosened system of campaign finance regulations is encouraging wealthy individuals to weigh in on behalf of candidates and causes, Mr. Ricketts became a case study in the risks of political neophytes with big checkbooks seeking to play at the highest and roughest levels of politics....

64 comments:

campy said...

So, anybody here still think Underwear Guy has a shot?

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

David said...

He's a true conservative--except when he wants public financing for those improvements to his baseball park.

Jay said...

Liberal groups encouraged like-minded investors to drop their accounts with TD Ameritrade,

What Ricketts needs to understand is that there are:

A. Very few liberals in America
B. Even fewer liberals who put their money where their mouth is.

This is a mistake.

Ken said...

The MSM is unwilling to vet Obama and is now taking steps to silence those who would. Is anyone really surprised?

Americans should know about Obama's spiritual advisor. That he's an embarrassment to Obama and the left is an indictment of them as well. "Move along. Nothing to see here".

ndspinelli said...

Ricketts is a feed off the public trough "conservative." Chrissake, he bought the Cubs, he's a loser by definition.

Aridog said...

Just an idea, but .... can't the good ole Rev Wright just be prodded in to his own diatribes? Seems like he's prime for it. He likes to talk. Talk a lot. Let him draw the attention and the fire, while still providing the information. Republicans can just be quietly and amused ... the effect on the electorate would be even better.

dreams said...

No No No don't God Bless those liberals, God Damn those liberals.

I suggest reading powerline this morning.

bagoh20 said...

The message is: You better shut up or I'll hurt many innocent people and break things. I'm angry, and you know what that means.
I have no scruples nor decency, and I've proven it, so you better care about these people, because I don't.

Lovely people.

rhhardin said...

He should put everything in Treasuries and try again.

Let them boycott the government.

ricpic said...

Maybe it's best that Obama not be linked to Wright. Execrable crap sandwich that Wright is at least he's an honest crap sandwich.

MadisonMan said...

Next time he'll know to launder the money though offshore banks so that no one knows he is the source.

PeterK said...

not surprised but this is why the conservative blogosphere is so important. It serves to expose the duplicitous tolerance of the liberal/progressives. They only free speech they believe in is their own

Quayle said...

Some people are willing to pledge their lives, their fortunes and their sacred Honor for very important things.

Others aren't so willing - they can't bring themselves to be independent of some of their things, so they'll never be independent of all possible things.

What you hold on to is holding on to you.

EDH said...

Does the Wright issue have much mileage left anyway?

Alex said...

You can't win if you lay your arms down. Romney is a loser.

Scott M said...

Does the Wright issue have much mileage left anyway?

I'd say the claim by Wright that he was approached with a bride gave it a little more gas. Not much, but more.

Chip S. said...

Amazing how persuasive Obama and his minions are when dealing with people who're very worried about the IRS and the SEC.

Lem said...

This will not be the case when it comes to Romney's Mormonism.

Obama will use it.. with the help of the MSM.

virgil xenophon said...

Anybody who doesn't think we are presently living thru the formation of a proto-fascist--ney, FASCIST--state is TOTALLY delusional.

Rocketeer said...

Hmmm. I have an idea for a Kickstarter campaign.

Piercello said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Piercello said...

And yet...

Obama's Wright connection comes up in the media again;

the media double standard is illuminated again;

Romney immediately repudiates using the Wright connection as an issue, giving him political cover;

and the PAC never actually spends the 10 million.

Strategery?

machine said...

If Rev. Wright is on the table, then Joseph Smith and his "teachings" are too (including the claim that God was once a man who lived on another planet)....

Phil 3:14 said...

Distraction.

Economy, Debt, governmental over reach. Those are the issues.

I'm sure the Obama campaign would love the campaign to be about:
-war on women
- gay marriage
,- environment
- 1%'ers
,- race
- religion

Mitchell said...

It's all for the best as the money would be better spent on economic charts.

Lem said...

Romney immediately repudiates using the Wright connection as an issue, giving him political cover;

and the PAC never actually spends the 10 million.

Strategery?


Its a republican war on Obama.

AprilApple said...

Everybody knows Wright's nut-job words inspired Obama to sit in the pews starting in 1988.

The democrats sure know how to circle the wagons to protect their king.

Chip S. said...

If Romney chose to attend for many years a particular Mormon church specifically known for its highly politicized sermons, the the content of those sermons would indeed be fair game.

That, of course, is not what "machine" is talking about.

Vilifying someone solely b/c of his generic religion is the very essence of bigotry.

Lem said...

Obama may regret not having to defend a "distraction" over which he triumphed.

Obama only gets to kill Bin Laden once.

machine said...

"I'm not familiar precisely with exactly what I said, but I stand by what I said, whatever it was."


This is the result of an etch-a-sketch campaign...

X said...

So, anybody here still think Underwear Guy has a shot?

Hahahahahahahahahaha.


meanwhile President Mom Jeans is being primaried in an unprecedented fashion by lawyers and convicts. He better hope a used car salesmen doesn't leap into the race.

phx said...

The democrats sure know how to circle the wagons to protect their king.

And at this point the repubs are more often their own worst enemy.

phx said...

Vilifying someone solely b/c of his generic religion is the very essence of bigotry.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I don't think we have to vilify anyone but religions are essentially philosophical systems, aren't they? Why shouldn't that be up for examination or discussion?

harrogate said...

"And yet...

Obama's Wright connection comes up in the media again;

the media double standard is illuminated again;

Romney immediately repudiates using the Wright connection as an issue, giving him political cover;

and the PAC never actually spends the 10 million.

Strategery?"

This. Whole story, right there.

Seriously. It never ceases to amaze me how willing we seem to be as a country, to talk endlessly about what we are ostensibly not talking about, and through it all we somehow manage to remain fired up about how we are not talking about it.

Really now. Nobody who paid any attention at all to the election in 2008, regardless of who they voted for, went into that booth without having heard lots about Wright, Ayers, etc.

Paddy O said...

Good.

Using that money to bring in Wright is a waste of money. It's a distraction.

Obama has a record now. Don't get caught up in trying to tie him to someone who may or may not reflect Obama's views.

Wright was brought up again and again in 2008, and Obama was elected. It's a distraction and it's a losing strategy.

It allows Obama to take the higher ground while at the same time avoiding responsibility for what he actually has done while in office.

This election is not about Rev. Wright. Go at Obama for what Obama has said, and not said, what Obama has done, and not done.

Romney needs approach this with the attitude: "Nothing personal, you're a good guy, just a terrible president"

Focus on the record, not the person.
He does that, he wins.

phx said...

Paddy O is church right there.

Scott M said...

And at this point the repubs are more often their own worst enemy.

What does that mean? "And at this point"? Team Obama has been misfiring again and again. If that label, "their own worst enemy" could be applied right now to either campaign, it would be Obama's.

The Drill SGT said...

ndspinelli said...
Ricketts is a feed off the public trough "conservative." Chrissake, he bought the Cubs, he's a loser by definition.


LOL,

a wimp, he should have taken a lesson from Bain.

Buy the Cubs
Sell off the Field, the players, the name, and the team rights. Let somebody else start fresh in Boise or Reno :)

Scott M said...

I don't think we have to vilify anyone but religions are essentially philosophical systems, aren't they?

Sure, but what usually gets thwacked at Mormons is the origin, not how they operate morally.

Chip S. said...

Why shouldn't that be up for examination or discussion?

Because all religions sound nutty to people outside them.

Agreeing not to call everybody to task for every weird aspect of his or her general religion is to establish a truce to religious strife that is essential to a pluralistic society.

That's why.

phx said...

What does that mean? "And at this point"? Team Obama has been misfiring again and again. If that label, "their own worst enemy" could be applied right now to either campaign, it would be Obama's.

"At this point" means they might get over it and do better in the future, we'll see. The Repubs have a lot of problems within their own ranks - the fringe of the GOP looks like the face of the GOP, whether it's fair or not. The birthers, the Wright issue, the extremes to which some of their rank and file portray Obama, not to mention how rudely personal they get tend to work against the GOP IMO.
Dems do that too but, again IMO, not to the extent that the GOP is hurt by it.
Romney seems to understand this but I think he'll still be plagued by the Rush Limbaughs, the Breitbarts, the worst elements of the Tea Party.

phx said...

Agreeing not to call everybody to task for every weird aspect of his or her general religion is to establish a truce to religious strife that is essential to a pluralistic society.

That's not a bad reason for keeping it out of the political discourse.

I still think it should be appropriate to respectfully but critically examine these belief systems in the marketplace of ideas. They are ideas after all and shouldn't be completely off limits unless you live in Iran or some such place.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Wright was nothing more than a racist firebrand 'preacher' that Obama supporters either agreed with or ignored since they went all in to vote for the hip dude.

Any other politician with that type of relationship would have been run out on a rail but as with everything, liberals live by different rules.

Obama has to try to defend a piss poor job performance. I don't care about his idiot preacher.

Chip S. said...

I still think it should be appropriate to respectfully but critically examine these belief systems...

I don't know how this could be done, or even what it means to "critically examine" something like, say, "virgin birth" respectfully. So I don't make it any sort of basis for evaluating people's views on other topics, nor do I badger them about it.

I agree with ScottM that it's perfectly OK to take into account the behavior patterns that are associated with various religions. And on that score, Mormons seem to rank pretty highly (duly noting CrackMC's insistence that they're a cabal of sociopaths).

al said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
al said...

Funny thing about the Rickets family - it was reported last Sunday that one of his daughters is a huge Obama support and campaign bundler.
 
Family dinner must be fun..

phx said...

nor do I badger them about it.

Nobody should be badgered about their religions or their belief systems - their behaviors are different.

That doesn't mean a religion's theology or its scriptures shouldn't be critically and openly discussed, even if you can't conceive of how that could be done. This is the USA, not Saudi Arabia.

edutcher said...

Two points:

Old news in the minds of most people.

It's still the economy and we're not stupid (what scares the Lefties).

This is why the Romster is pulling ahead, he isn't going to be distracted.

machine said...

If Rev. Wright is on the table, then Joseph Smith and his "teachings" are too (including the claim that God was once a man who lived on another planet)....

For creep Leftists like the mindless automaton, when was it ever off the table?

traditionalguy said...

Obama never cared about what Wright said, unless he could pick up a few good phrases to use when speaking to northern black audiences. He only attended as a career move arranged by his patron Ayers.

Why make false accusations that cannot be proven, and let Obama's Campaign win by destroying them as if they are the issue? The issue is economic collapse.

Plead not what you need not, for fear that you will have to prove what you cannot!

Chip S. said...

This is the USA, not Saudi Arabia.

Yes. And one of the essential differences is that we don't go around "critically evaluating" everybody's religious beliefs the way they do there.

Really, this shouldn't be difficult as long as you're not determined to wave the "Mormons are weird" banner this fall.

phx said...

Really, this shouldn't be difficult as long as you're not determined to wave the "Mormons are weird" banner this fall.

If that's your goal then you need to establish a better justification than "it's not polite to discuss religion in the USA." Because that's just too bad for anyone who thinks that.

We can *critically* discuss and argue about virtually anything, even if it makes you uncomfortable, or defensive, or angry.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

So pushing back on Ricketts and his checkbook is good, and Obama using the power and authority of his office to expose and punish donors who legally contribute to another campaign isn't going to get one solitary mention here?

You're busted.

Thorley Winston said...

Romney is right not to engage on this. Whether one thinks that McCain was too hesitant to go after Obama in 2008 that was when Obama was a relatively unknown half-term Senator (a “cypher” as many called him), the time when this (much like Obama’s lack of executive experience) could have been made an issue is long since passed. This is 2012 and Obama is a one-term President with a very public record and that’s the field that Romney needs to do battle on. Romney is wise not to try to refight the last battle.

MadisonMan said...

If Rev. Wright is on the table, then Joseph Smith and his "teachings" are too (including the claim that God was once a man who lived on another planet)...

Right, because what Joseph Smith said in the 19th century and what Rev. Wright said in the 21st century are equivalent.

(Is it *really* necessary for me to add -- explicitly -- an eyeroll?)

Chip S. said...

@phx--Now you're distorting my words, so I have no further interest in this discussion.

You have tried, and utterly failed, to establish a reasonable basis for the crap you clearly want to hurl at Romney.

But the Axelturfers will do this no matter what.

Bigotry is about all you have left. And you'll use it freely, justifying it to yourselves as some sort of rational discussion of the relative merits of Mormonism vs. some unstated other, apparently logically coherent, religion.

phx said...

@phx--Now you're distorting my words, so I have no further interest in this discussion.

You have tried, and utterly failed, to establish a reasonable basis for the crap you clearly want to hurl at Romney.

But the Axelturfers will do this no matter what.

Bigotry is about all you have left. And you'll use it freely, justifying it to yourselves as some sort of rational discussion of the relative merits of Mormonism vs. some unstated other, apparently logically coherent, religion.


Utter bullshit. Dig the future tense allegations against me: "You clearly want to..." ""And you'll use it freely..." Get an argument.

Andy R. said...

"Pushing back the billionaire who was going to spend $10 million on ads linking Obama to Jeremiah Wright."

But then who will vet the man that has been President for the last four years? Can Ricketts do a commercial about Obama's high school transcripts instead?

damikesc said...

Just unload on him over it. Screw Obama and his moronic sycophants. They think a false allegation of bullying over 50 yrs ago is worth discussing.

Make him swallow his allegiance to Wright for years.

Why shouldn't that be up for examination or discussion?

I agree. Progressives, though, get REALLY mad when you look into Obama's church for 20 years. Any idea why?

Wright was brought up again and again in 2008

If by "again and again", do you mean "only in the Democratic primary"? McCain never brought it up.

But then who will vet the man that has been President for the last four years? Can Ricketts do a commercial about Obama's high school transcripts instead?

Probably not, given that our smartest Resident ever has managed to not actually prove that he was a great student ever.

phx said...

Dems' prayer: Oh please let damikesc's ideas take hold in the Romney campaign committee.

That's what I meant about GOP being their own worst enemy for now.

damikesc said...

Oh please let damikesc's ideas take hold in the Romney campaign committee.

Who says Romney should do it?

Let somebody else do it while he stays above the fray.

...you know, like the Resident does.

Paddy O said...

"If by "again and again", do you mean "only in the Democratic primary"?"

No, I mean by the entire right blogosphere. It was like the annoying kid who constantly tried to convince you to care. People who care, already care and know about it and have shaped their opinion about it. It's a tired tactic.

Blue@9 said...

Because all religions sound nutty to people outside them.

Agreeing not to call everybody to task for every weird aspect of his or her general religion is to establish a truce to religious strife that is essential to a pluralistic society.

That's why.


This.

There's little reason to discuss the religious beliefs of politicians unless there's something really political or objectionable about the doctrine. Most politicians dispose of this problem quickly by saying they'll uphold the Constitution. Do we really want to get into debates about whether you're really eating Christ's body or whether Joseph Smith was a charlatan? There's no way to resolve such questions, apart from dying and finding out.

damikesc said...

There's little reason to discuss the religious beliefs of politicians unless there's something really political or objectionable about the doctrine. Most politicians dispose of this problem quickly by saying they'll uphold the Constitution. Do we really want to get into debates about whether you're really eating Christ's body or whether Joseph Smith was a charlatan? There's no way to resolve such questions, apart from dying and finding out.

...except Progressives have been "discussing" Mormonism for a while now.

Where do you think leftist posters got the witty "underwear man" comments?

phx said...

...except Progressives have been "discussing" Mormonism for a while now.

Where do you think leftist posters got the witty "underwear man" comments?


Yeah, that's not worthy of anyone.