Guilty Until Proven Innocent With Lawyers Turned Politicians

Here we are in the home stretch of the campaign cycle leading up to the election on November 2. I often wonder about how people that aren't tuned in to politics and history really see elections. After all, if you don't pay much attention, either due to anger or frustration, or due simply to a lack of interest, how are you supposed to make the best guess as to who's best for the job?

You get a handful of ads with each candidate either bashing their opponents record, or propping up their own record, (often misleading more than a little bit). This is going to regard the current story about the Chamber Of Commerce and the funding of political ads.

You only get a few chances to truly change the future of our country, good or bad. It's pretty much always been true that most people don't like politicians. That's perhaps never been more true than it is today. Let's start on the Chamber of Commerce story.

You know the charge, the Chamber of Commerce is supposedly funding Republican campaign ads in an attempt to defeat the Democrats, (even though some of the Chamber's ads are in fact for "Blue Dog" conservative Democrats but never mind that). They have no proof but you've probably seen some of the ads, especially this one.

The most fascinating part of all this is that they have no evidence, they just need a topic to run on because the over-regulation, high-tax progressive way of doing things is having the exact results Conservatives have been expecting and warning against. I have a question for the Democrats though...

Where was the outrage and the campaign ads from the DNC for Chinagate during the Clinton presidency?

"Twenty-two people were eventually convicted of fraud or for funneling Asian funds into the United States elections, and others fled U.S. jurisdiction. Several of these were associates of Bill Clinton or Al Gore."

The key word there is "convicted". That means that there was actual proof, (unlike the current charges against the Chamber of Commerce by the Obama administration). Are you starting to see why they hope you stay uninformed when it comes to history? If you don't follow these things then you are easier to fool with a nice little campaign ad. It's a last minute desperate ploy to save the Democrats from what is looking more and more like it's going to be a landslide defeat for the left, we'll have to wait and see.

The Obama administration wants the Chamber of Commerce to disclose all of their donors, (which they have no legal obligation to do). However, it's no secret that the Obama administration has the support of the unions who do things like this. The Chamber of Commerce doesn't want to disclose it's donors because thug union groups out to socialize and destroy this country will send people to the homes of the donors to intimidate them, (which is illegal if you are literally on the doorstep of a private residence).

Need more proof about the unions intentions, you don't have to look any farther than the 10-2-10 rally in D.C. which was organized by the labor unions and CPUSA, (Communist Party USA).

Given what we've seen in the past from the labor unions it's pretty reasonable to keep your donors secret. If Obama has proof then he needs to provide it, if not then he should apologize. He's a lawyer, I thought they believed in innocent until proven guilty? I guess that only applies when the accusations are against the Liberals in the eyes of the left.