quetiapine cost

Video: Toomey says the Tea Party is “Amazing” and “Very Constructive.” What??

Pat Toomey recently called the Tea Party “amazing” and said the people involved in the movement have been a “very constructive force.” Do the tea baggers in the video below seem like a constructive force to you?


Please make a contribution today to help expose Pat Toomey’s extremism.

Use the button below to share this video with your friends via Facebook, Twitter or email!

  • Share/Bookmark

Video: Toomey is delighted to be supported by Palin, Rove, Santorum and the tea baggers

Pat Toomey’s extremist supporters include Karl Rove, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum and many tea baggers. Do you want them to elect your next senator? Please watch the video below and the share it with your friends!


Please make a contribution today to help expose Pat Toomey’s extremism.

Use the button below to share this video with your friends via Facebook, Twitter or email!

  • Share/Bookmark

Toomey gets big $ from oil and coal interests, doesn’t see link between human behavior and global warming. Coincidence?

Lucia Graves writing at the Huffington Post points out that Pat Toomey may have some monetary incentive to not believe that human activity has caused climate change:

Pennsylvania Senate candidate Pat Toomey drew headlines when he said in a local radio interview on Friday, that the degree to which human activity is to blame for global warming is being “very much disputed” and “debated.”

It’s not the first time he’s made the argument.

“There is much debate in the scientific community as to the precise sources of global warming,” Toomey claimed in June.

Trolling Opensecrets.org, HuffPost found Toomey’s top contributors include oil and coal giants Koch Industries ($15,000) and Murray Energy ($16,655).

To paraphrase Upton Sinclair, it is apparently difficult to get a man to understand something when his campaign account depends on his not understanding it.

You can listen to Pat’s latest remarks about the “dispute” over whether human activity has caused global warming below:

  • Share/Bookmark

Dick Armey says Pat Toomey is responsible for birth of the Tea Party

Apparently Congressman Wall Street is also the Godfather of the Tea Party.

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Tom Fitzgerald has posted a video clip of Tea Party enthusiast Dick Armey tracing the origin of the Tea Party movement back to Pat Toomey’s 2004 Senate campaign.

We’d say that personally giving birth to the Tea Party and its long list of wingnut candidates is pretty clear evidence of Toomey’s right-wing extremism. Wouldn’t you?

  • Share/Bookmark

Watch our new web ad “They Keep Coming…”

Pat Toomey has now raised $14 million in this senate campaign. Watch our new web ad below to find out where those millions are coming from:



Please make a contribution today to help expose Pat Toomey’s special interest agenda.


Use the button below to share this video with your friends via Facebook, Twitter or email!

  • Share/Bookmark

Mother Jones on Toomey, Derivatives and Wall Street

Mother Jones magazine has a great piece on Pat Toomey’s history as a derivatives trader and how he helped to deregulate the industry as a Congressman, with disastrous consequences for our economy.

Mother Jones finds Toomey’s characterization of the interest rate and currency swaps he traded as “non-risky” to be, uh, non-true:

During the campaign, Toomey has referred to the products he worked with as “non-risky” “common derivatives,” different from the “toxic” mortgage-backed derivatives that some believe caused the financial crisis. “That’s not true,” says Michael Greenberger, a professor at the University of Maryland and former CFTC official. “It just so happens that the 2008 meltdown involved credit default swaps, but interest rate swaps and currency swaps can be as risky as anything else. These swaps are very, very risky.”

Toomey’s defense ignores the recent history of interest rate swaps, which led to fiscal problems for many American towns, cities, and states across the country in recent years. The US never had a House-of-Lords-type decision forbidding municipalities from making these sorts of deals. So just as Morgan Grenfell had in the ’80s, US banks pressed local governments to agree to swap deals to bring in extra revenue. And this time, many of the banks allegedly paid kickbacks on the deals. (The kickbacks are the subject of an ongoing federal investigation.) In Pennsylvania alone, 107 school districts reportedly entered into swap deals—”gambling with the public’s money,” according to the state’s auditor general. Some have since paid millions of dollars to Wall Street banks to get out from under the deals. Chicago, Denver, Kansas City, Missouri, Philadelphia, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Oregon all recently lost money on similar swap deals, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The article goes on to discuss how Toomey championed the deregulation that would eventually lead directly to the global financial meltdown that we’re still feeling the effects of today…

Unlike most members of Congress, Toomey, the former derivatives trader, knew exactly what was going on with the CFMA—and had been pushing for it for months. In October, he had urged Congress to pass a similar bill—saying that it would “eliminate most of the cloud of legal and regulatory uncertainty that has shadowed” derivatives since their invention. Two months before that, he boasted to a House banking committee hearing that the derivatives industry “has done enormous good and has been an enormous force for positive change in our economy generally.”

Toomey’s derivatives cheerleading continued for the duration of his time in Congress. In 2001, he boasted on a campaign website that he had been “putting his experience in International finance to work” on “important legislation,” including the “authorization of derivatives trading.” In 2003, he praised the expansion of the derivatives market as “perhaps the most important, creative and innovative development in finance in the last 30 years.”

By the time of the 2008 crash, derivative swaps had grown into a market with a notional worldwide value of $600 trillion—ten times the annual output of every economy in the world. The state banking supervisors who Toomey said would “continue to regulate” swaps did nothing while traders at Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and AIG made bets they couldn’t possibly pay out on. Eventually, the system collapsed on itself.

Toomey didn’t see it coming. In fact, he has a history of playing down the threat of systemic financial problems. The planners of the 1998 LTCM hedge fund bailout were hailed on the cover of Time magazine as the “Committee to Save the World.” But for Toomey, the lesson of the committee’s work was not that the financial system was fragile or that highly leveraged financial institutions could bring others down with them. Nor was it that unregulated, off-exchange derivatives trading could lead to disaster. Instead, he promised Derivatives Strategy readers that he would “resist…any effort to impose inappropriate regulations.” After all, he said, LTCM was a “big problem” that was “essentially solved.” Not everyone agrees. “I have found virtually no evidence that the legalization of speculative derivatives did anything other than increase systemic risk,” Stout says.

In some sense, Toomey’s triumphalist attitude towards derivatives is unsurprising. It’s not just because his ideological conservatism predisposes him to loath regulation. It’s also because unregulated trading of derivatives benefited him and his family. As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” But perhaps a quote from Derivatives Strategy is more appropriate. After hearing Toomey’s positions on regulation, the trade paper rejoiced. Toomey’s “passionate discourse is music to the ears of derivatives players around the country,” the paper reported. And indeed it was. Unfortunately, things didn’t work out too well for the rest of us.

Click here to read the entire article at MotherJones.com

  • Share/Bookmark

Toomey says he’s just like Santorum, but he’s actually worse (video)

In the video below, Pat Toomey says he’s just like Rick Santorum. But the truth is that Toomey is even more extreme than Santorum.


Please make a contribution today to help expose Pat Toomey’s extremism.

Use the button below to share this video with your friends via Facebook, Twitter or email!

  • Share/Bookmark

He’s baaaack! (and he’s still Karl Rove)

Karl Rove’s no-need-to-disclose-our-donors group “American Crossroads GPS” is back in PA with another TV ad on the air.

Never one to let the truth get in the way of whatever point he’s trying to make (and really, who can forget the whole “Saddam Hussein has WMDs” thing he was pushing about eight years ago), this ad contains some of the same bogus, incorrect or wildly exaggerated claims the Rove/GPS gang was called out for back in August.

For example, Rove’s ad says “[Joe Sestak] voted to gut Medicare” while on-screen it says “voted to cut Medicare by $500 Billion.”

FactCheck.org noted in August “that’s a wild exaggeration. It’s true that the law calls for restraining the future growth of Medicare spending by about $555 billion — about a 7 percent reduction spread over the next 10 years. And millions who now have private Medicare Advantage plans are likely to see their extra benefits reduced. But that hardly amounts to eviscerating the program.”

And there’s more B.S., as Rove’s ad says “Sestak even voted to raise taxes over $500 Billion, devastating small businesses, killing jobs.”  (Notice how Karl likes that $500 Billion number?)

But CNN says “$525 billion in job killing taxes? The Congressional Budget Office now estimates the total tax hike at $643 billion, and whether that will cost jobs or not is unclear. Republicans cite economists who say higher taxes force companies to limit growth, or even cut back and that would certainly mean fewer jobs. Democrats argue that since more people will have access to health care that will create more employment in clinics, doctors’ offices, pharmacies and all their related industries. Without a reliable crystal ball, we don’t know right now which side – if either – will be proven right by the passing years. So to characterize the taxes as definitively ‘job killing’ is a stretch.”

That’s really all the ad has to say, and neither item is correct, so why is this ad on the air at all?

  • Share/Bookmark

Toomey’s year in Hong Kong

We’d been among the curious about what Pat Toomey was up to during 1991, the year he spent working in Hong Kong.

On Friday, Greg Sargeant published this nugget in the Washington Post:   he did research on capital market formation in southeast Asia for a company owned by the billionaire Chan brothers.

And Sargeant gave us one very juicy tidbit about one of the Chans:

Ronnie Chan, was a former Enron director who settled a massive $168 million lawsuit brought against the company by shareholders. In addition to his link to Enron, Chan has repeatedly scoffed at American hopes for a more democratized China.

According to Sargeant’s story, Pat’s campaign manager, Mark Harris, “laughed off” the suggestion that Pat might now be accused “of helping build up a Chan-owned company” and/or linked “to today’s fears of Chinese currency manipulation.”  Harris thinks folks who oppose Toomey “must be getting pretty desperate to dig up what Pat did twenty years ago.”

That’s the kind of thing Harris is expected to say to the Washington Post.  But we suspect Harris wasn’t laughing so much after he hung up the phone.  He knows what Pat did 20 years ago is not only relevant to this U.S. Senate race, but also potentially very damaging to Pat’s self-portrait as the regular guy looking out for the interests of average working Pennsylvanians.

What if it turns out that Pat is really more interested in the success of the average Chinese billionaire?

Stay tuned…

  • Share/Bookmark

Toomey was for earmarks before he was against them

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Tom Fitzgerald points out Pat Toomey’s hypocrisy on earmarks. It seems that before Pat found religion on earmarks, he secured millions of dollars in funding for a company that in turn became his biggest campaign contributor. Here are some highlights:

But in his first term representing the Lehigh Valley’s 15th District, Toomey won at least $9 million in earmarks, including $3 million for a private company that became for a time his largest single source of campaign contributions.

In the two years leading up to his 2000 reelection campaign, Toomey reaped $25,161 in donations from Air Products – $10,000 from its political action committee and the rest from employees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. For the 2002 election cycle, Toomey received $20,450 from Air Products employees and $10,000 from the PAC.

Employees of Air Products donated $10,200 to Toomey’s Senate campaign through June, according to campaign-finance records. The company’s PAC contributed $5,000.

You can read the full article at Philly.com

  • Share/Bookmark