Email flame-wars with a 'Reply All'

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

Okay, so I had a 'cousin' (actually just linked loosely through mtDNA and for some reason has decided to adopt me as close cousin) emailed me and others with some information on the Democrats fault & connection with the Financial bailout and all. I responded back all with the 'need to check things out.. www.snopes.com'.

Anyway, the proverbial poo has been flying. I've just been deleting.

But the last one caught my attention since one poster SWORE they KNEW Obama was 'muslim'.
She was replying to someone who said the biggest benefactors from Freddie/Fannie was #1 Chris Dodd #2, Barack Obama.. and then I stopped reading and deleted.

Does anyone know of this type of 'list' is going around and how to debunk it?

Thanks.

(I did check snopes, but found nothing).

[PeaceNikki]

1. here

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/fanniemae.asp

Oh, on edit... I see that this person was referring to something else. Without more info, I dunno.

[Warpy]

2. There's a spam email shitstorm going on right now

and the best way to deal with it is a debunk reply to all followed by the promise to block all further spam GOP emails.

Then do it. Anybody who needs to get in touch with you can use the phone or a stamp.

I've had to block my mailbox over the weekend a couple of times for the "reply to all" folks to get discouraged.

There isn't much we can do about the shitstorm troopers who are dutifully passing this stuff on for god and party except inconvenience them by making them delete our name from the "reply to all" list once we've blocked them.

If anybody repeats this stuff within earshot, I laugh at them and mention there are some chumps in this world who will buy any lie the Repugs care to tell.

[csziggy]

3. The bad news is that they spread the money around, especially to the party in charge

The federal government recently announced that it will come to the rescue of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two embattled mortgage buyers that for years have pursued a lobbying strategy to get lawmakers on their side. Both companies have poured money into lobbying and campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties and committees as a general tactic, but they've also directed those contributions strategically. In the 2006 election cycle, Fannie Mae was giving 53 percent of its total $1.3 million in contributions to Republicans, who controlled Congress at that time. This cycle, with Democrats in control, they've reversed course, giving the party 56 percent of their total $1.1 million in contributions. Similarly, Freddie Mac has given 53 percent of its $555,700 in contributions to Democrats this cycle, compared to the 44 percent it gave during 2006.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also strategically given more contributions to lawmakers currently sitting on committees that primarily regulate their industry. Fifteen of the 25 lawmakers who have received the most from the two companies combined since the 1990 election sit on either the House Financial Services Committee; the Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee; or the Senate Finance Committee. The others have seats on the powerful Appropriations or Ways & Means committees, are members of the congressional leadership or have run for president.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html

Barack Obama got all but $6000 of the ~$126,000 he got from those two organizations from individual donors - not from the PACs that lobby for them.

This is probably the source for that list since it is in the same order as the email you quote: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html

But compare the amounts given to republicans vs. democrats up to 2002 with how much has been donated since Barack Obama has been in the Senate: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?cycle=A&type=P&id=D000000163

Now, remember, that main goal for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is to make sure there are funds for regular Americans to get mortgages to buy houses. So although they needed help right now, I do not see those as evil industries. On the other hand, look at how much money is donated to Republicans from the oil & gas industry that is making record profits: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=E01

McCain got nearly $2 million from oil & gas donors to his presidential campaign (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.php?cid=N00006424&cycle=2008) - that industry is not even in Barack Obama's top twenty list of industry donors (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.php?cid=N00009638&cycle=2008).

John McCain's top donor list looks like a roll call for the Wall Street firms in this bailout mess:
Merrill Lynch $349,170
Citigroup Inc $287,801
Morgan Stanley $249,377
Goldman Sachs $220,045
JPMorgan Chase & Co $206,392
AT&T Inc $183,663
Credit Suisse Group $175,503
PricewaterhouseCoopers $163,670
Blank Rome LLP $153,426
US Government $152,118
US Army $150,470
Wachovia Corp $147,456
Greenberg Traurig LLP $145,737
UBS AG $141,365
Bank of America $133,975
FedEx Corp $121,904
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $120,246
US Dept of Defense $118,125
Lehman Brothers $115,707
Bear Stearns $108,000
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00006424

While Barack Obama's list includes some of those firms, his list is much more diverse:
Goldman Sachs $739,521
University of California $697,506
Harvard University $501,489
Citigroup Inc $492,548
Google Inc $487,355
JPMorgan Chase & Co $475,112
National Amusements Inc $432,169
Microsoft Corp $429,656
UBS AG $419,550
Lehman Brothers $391,774
Wilmerhale Llp $383,024
Time Warner $375,063
Sidley Austin LLP $370,916
Skadden, Arps et al $360,409
Stanford University $341,399
Morgan Stanley $341,380
Latham & Watkins $328,879
Jones Day $309,960
University of Chicago $294,237
General Electric $290,584
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638