RNC turns Obama’s $150-million month into attack
posted at 10:33 am on October 21, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Can the Republicans turn Barack Obama’s massive fundraising effort into a negative? They’re certainly going to try. Yesterday, the RNC launched a new website that lists all of the donors who gave less than $200 since John McCain officially became the GOP nominee for President, when he ended his own fundraising to accept public financing. Obama, who reneged on his promise to use public financing, refuses to release donor information on donations under the same level. ABC’s Jake Tapper takes notice:
In an attempt at political jujitsu (soon to enter the Hall of Verboten Clichés — but not yet), the McCain campaign and the RNC have been attempting to put Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., on the defensive about his record-shattering fundraising, which includes an unprecedented $150 million September.
Obama, of course, opted out of public financing despite an earlier pledge to do so, an issue of real contention for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who (rightly) feels it’s a broken promise Obama hasn’t gotten much heat for from either the media or government reform proponents.
More recently, Republicans have been pointing out that Obama does not disclose the names of donors who contribute less than $200 to his campaign. He is under no legal obligation to do so, but his failure to provide those names, it can certainly be argued, doesn’t live up to his pledges of transparency and openness. …
I myself haven’t heard a good reason as to why Obama is refusing to disclose the names of these donors, unlike the McCain campaign.
There really is no good reason not to reveal their donors. If the RNC can do it with a website in the middle of a presidential campaign, then the Obama campaign certainly can as well. Do they want to admit to a certain amount of incompetence at basic data management that will undermine their tech-savvy patina, especially after shooting themselves in the foot for making fun of John McCain’s inability to use e-mail? I think not.
Politico’s Ben Smith offers one possible explanation:
The Obama camp hasn’t a terribly clear explanation of its refusal to go beyond the legal requirement, but there’s one straightforward political reason: Disclosing your small donors means that other Democrats can hit up your list. Keeping them secret enhances the power of Obama and his organization within Democratic politics.
That doesn’t make much sense. The RNC’s site only lists first and last name and the amount of the donation, and no other contact information. That won’t help any other candidates in building a donor list for themselves. Besides, isn’t the party leader supposed to help other candidates?
It looks more like Team Obama doesn’t want people perusing the massive numbers of donors with names like Qwerty Poiuy, Asdfgh Lkjh’;, and Zxcvb Mn09876 from the states of PO, ZX, and QW. So much for openness and transparency.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
This is McCain’s shit sandwich to enjoy all by himself. Whether you resent Obama’s decision to not release such info is irrelevent – he is obeying the law. A very stupid law.
LimeyGeek on October 21, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Ben Smith has his head so far up Obama’s ass it’s amazing he can breathe. Obama has lied about everything in this campaign and the media continues to play along.
I’m leaning towards our being admitted into the EU and then enjoying the ensuing revolution that is bound to occur. I wouldn’t mind seeing some borders changed.
grdred944 on October 21, 2008 at 11:34 AM
Lesson in logic 101 (listen closely, DRywall):
Who owns the oil? The people of Alaska.
Now, the people of Alaska aren’t going to be able to drill it themselves. So they, through their government, sell those rights to people who can drill and get it. The severance fee is the price for getting the oil.
A large portion of the profit from selling the rights (the severance fee) is returned to the shareholders (the citizens of the state of Alaska). A proper business tries to maximize its return on a tangible item.
So Gov. Palin, by negotiating a better deal, is demonstrating smart business sense on behalf of her shareholders (the people who chose her to serve as governor).
Imagine, DRywall, that you owned something that was highly desired. Would you not attempt to maximize your return on it, should you opt to sell it? Of course you would, I would think. However, having seen many of your comments, I can’t be completely certain of that, though.
either orr on October 21, 2008 at 11:35 AM
I doubt very much he’s enjoying it…but he his eating it. Perhaps the aftertaste will impel him to alter course when the issue comes up after he is elected president.
ManlyRash on October 21, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Do they have to keep the records of the $200 and less donors? Could the feds ask for these records at any time?
If not, what’s to keep someone from getting $100 million in legitimate donations (lets say $70 million from donations over $200 and the rest ligit donations under $200 – reporting the big ones, but not the little ones) and then another $50 million in illegally large or foreign contributions. Couldn’t they just say that they got $70 million that needs to be reported and $80 million from small donations?
Is there anyway to compel them to release those records to at least prove that they have the paper trail for the small donations?
JadeNYU on October 21, 2008 at 11:37 AM
jp, thanks for the detailed analysis.
I doubt DRywall and his “intellectual comrades-in-arms” will get it, though.
either orr on October 21, 2008 at 11:38 AM
DANG IT ALL TO HELL, eitherorr, you stole my dang thunder. Thanks a lot. *sighs in frustation*
ManlyRash on October 21, 2008 at 11:39 AM
ManlyRash, sorry. But you’ve done that to me on more than a few occasions.
And how the hell do you maintain your optimism? I marvel at that.
OT, go Penn State!
either orr on October 21, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Thank you. You saved me time typing a response to DRywall.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 21, 2008 at 11:41 AM
The Obama campaign has called me a total of three times about my $25 donation to him at the beginning of the year. First, they told me I could e-mail my passport number to expats@barackobama.com to verify my donation. Some months later, a lady called me up to get my passport number again. I told her that I had already e-mailed it to them, and she said OK. The same lady then called me back another few months later, and said that their system wasn’t able to find it, so I had to give her my passport number again.
You know, it would almost seem as if they didn’t even make any money on my donation at all, seeing as how they had to have someone call me three times in order to simply verify it.
Had only Obama’s campaign set up a better form on the Internet, this would have all been no problem. Or maybe, just maybe, they left the passport/SSN verification off the form to solicit grungy donations?
Seixon on October 21, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Be vewy, vewy quiet. Manly is huntin’ Canadien wabbit…
Mr_Magoo on October 21, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Dr.Cwac.Cwac., you’re welcome. Always a pleasure to befuddle a wascally wabbit.
either orr on October 21, 2008 at 11:45 AM
What optimism? At heart I’m a rank pessimist. My life is the Sufferdome.
ManlyRash on October 21, 2008 at 11:46 AM
It’s funny how you don’t see conservatives going to moonbat Websites and trying to convince them that they should vote Republican because the Democrat candidate isn’t quite Communistic enough for them.
But the moonbats come here and try to claim we should vote for Obama because Palin is too gosh-darned liberal.
Absolute immunity to cognitive dissonance isn’t by any means a sign of good mental health. But you have to admit that mindless zealotry solely for the sake of zealotry has its advantages in the political arena. Conservatives are easily distracted; we have jobs, families, religions and lives. Liberals have a lust for power – and absolutely nothing else.
And if liberals have to argue against Socialism to try and advance the cause of Socialism, they have absolutely no idea that they sound like idiots.
logis on October 21, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Heh heh heh heh…and I would have shot the wittle bastawd too, if someone ewse hadn’t shot him fiwst.
ManlyRash on October 21, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Not answering for Manly but in my case:
GOD IS AT HIS BEST WHEN MAN IS AT HIS WORST
Battleground Tracker Obam 48% – McCain 47%
Follow the links from Dirty Harry’s Place.
Mr_Magoo on October 21, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Bill, turd in the tank, Schneider of CNN was crowing the other day about how great OBama was doing with all this record breaking money coming from the “little guy” not big donors. He also has his smirky look when he said McCain is taking taxpayer dollars and Americans don’t like that. These feckless maggots will be the first to go to the guillotine when the revolution hits the streets after the election is stolen and all the money is taken by the corrupt Washington Elite.
wepeople on October 21, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Well, you lost me at “Go Penn State”. My wife graduated from the University of Michigan at Al-Ann Arbor. Rich Rodriguez has not earned my respect yet.
But getting back to the issue…..
Conservative always seem cool, calm and level-headed, while liberals are always screaming to get their point across. Why are liberals so angry? Repressed sexual frustration?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 21, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Important Update:
Obama & DNC Admit All Allegations of Federal Court Lawsuit – Obama’s “Not” Qualified to be President
Obama Should Immediately Withdraw his Candidacy for President
For Immediate Release: – 10/21/08 – Complete contact details and a pdf are at the end of this article
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania: “10/21/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that Obama and tbe DNC “ADMITTED”, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit. Obama is “NOT QUALIFIED” to be President and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President and the DNC shall substitute a qualified candidate. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.
Berg stated that he filed Requests for Admissions on September 15, 2008 with a response by way of answer or objection had to be served within thirty [30] days. No response to the Requests for Admissions was served by way of response or objection. Thus, all of the Admissions directed to Obama and the DNC are deemed “ADMITTED.” Therefore, Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President.
More Information: http://www.obamacrimes.com
AdrianS on October 21, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Linkee, please… thanks Ed!!
Califemme on October 21, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Or….. Could they need your passport # for foreign “matching” dollars in your name?
Califemme on October 21, 2008 at 12:13 PM
This American doesn’t like that, for sure.
I approve of Obama’s stand against taxpayer funded political campaigns…..it’s about the only thing I can agree with him on, but hey, from little ACORNs lol
LimeyGeek on October 21, 2008 at 12:15 PM
You’re handing out your passport number? Is there a genetic marker for that kind of stupidity?
LimeyGeek on October 21, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Dr.C.C., my wife is a PSU alum… my son is a freshman up there… my daughter is hoping to go there next year. Gotta support the family, y’know?
And liberals and repressed sexuality? That’s a touch oxymoronic to me. If you said hedonistic, I’d go along with it. Unless they can’t get what/who they want, that is…
either orr on October 21, 2008 at 12:36 PM
Hmmm… interesting… does this not show a HUGE amount of disorganization? I work with databases daily, and if your info was not updated correctly… then it is not a properly engineered database.
Its not rocket science, and with ALL of Obamas money, he could afford the best IF HE WANTED TO!
This feels like someone trying the Plausible Deniability defense… where they claim they are incompetant, and not breaking the law on purpose.
Romeo13 on October 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Infantile response to any frustration.
philwynk on October 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM
And who trained ACORN?
davidk on October 21, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Simply beyond belief.
The oil is owned by the state of Alaska. The oil companies lease the land, and then draw the oil out of the ground, but it’s not really their oil. So, they have to pay Alaska for the oil. That’s your “tax,” idiot. Geez. This is pure capitalism.
If you can’t tell the difference between this and a plan to tax the earnings of rich people and spread it around, which is Marxian socialism, then you need to head back to high school and take World Cultures again.
Of course, you know perfectly well how different these are; you’re just a shill for the D liars, and don’t mind prostituting yourself for their benefit.
philwynk on October 21, 2008 at 1:05 PM
To the collectivist, EVERYTHING is collectivism. We ‘free’ enterprise mavens are really just puppets who don’t yet realize we’re dancing on strings; futiley bucking against the tides of historical inevitability.
The philosophy of liberalism is pure tautology. The only thing about it that can’t be denied is its simplicity.
logis on October 21, 2008 at 1:20 PM
I think we’re all missing the larger point here.
Let’s assume for a minute that Dave is absolutely right that Governor Palin’s plan is indeed socialism.
How would that then support the conclusion – Obama’s socialism is not a problem at all?
“Person X did something socialist therefore socialism is fine” is not a valid argument unless we’ve already established that Person X can do no wrong.
Somehow I doubt that Dave is making the argument that Sarah Palin can do no wrong, therefore, I fail to see what his argument is at all.
JadeNYU on October 21, 2008 at 1:24 PM
How did we get here again?
I thought “words mean things.”
Y-not on October 21, 2008 at 1:41 PM
I think this whole subject should lay to rest once and for all the fairy tale that Democrats are the party of the poor.
Here in Indiana, people are already voting early. Obama has been telling them to go ahead and vote because after all they never know when their car might break down or they might not have money for gas. Poor little peasants. Maybe Barack should share that wealth and give all these poor little Democrats a ride to the polls. After all with all this money, he can easily afford to buy an election.
Speaking of how he made this money and all that, he made 9 million in one night at a Hollywood gala when a bunch of well heeled movie stars turned out to support the man of the people.
gag me.
Terrye on October 21, 2008 at 1:45 PM
Palin’s plan is not socialism. Alaska became a state late and its population was not large enough to support building a lot of infrastructure etc., so the state constitution dictates that a certain amount of the proceeds from drilling oil on government land should go back to the state.
Terrye on October 21, 2008 at 1:47 PM
Please keep posting Dave. Every post forcefully demonstrates that being a leftard and having an ability to think are mutually exclusive.
btw, the answer is that the people of the State of Alaska are the owners of the land and the natural resources under them. The people of the USA are not the owners of Joe the Plumbers business and income. Simple enough for even a leftard.
iconoclast on October 21, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Of course, that’s not what would actually happen. The reality is that an increased tax rate on the rich will decrease tax revenues from them, and we are already running a deficit, so all of those checks Obama plans on mailing out will be funded by borrowing, which, in turn, soaks up the capital that would otherwise be used to expand the economy.
And this is before we factor in the borrowing necessary to fund Obama’s other projects.
Count to 10 on October 21, 2008 at 3:05 PM
“I approve of Obama’s stand against taxpayer funded political campaigns….
I thought this money came from donations on the tax return?
davod on October 21, 2008 at 3:30 PM
Don’t forget the negative effect on philanthropy. Less private charity = more spending on social programs.
Y-not on October 21, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Someone in the McCain camp needs to get onto this one:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/10/obama_campaign_selling_chicago.html
(AND PLAY IT UP, BIG TIME !!)
pambi on October 21, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Goes without saying, doesn’t it?
The US has been nationalizing charity since FDR.
Celebrities want people to know that they are helping the pour, and using their money to push the government to give money to the pour seems to be more efficient at getting attention than giving the money directly.
If its not out of bounds for an atheist like me to mention, isn’t there a line in the bible about not letting one hand know the other is giving to charity?
Count to 10 on October 21, 2008 at 4:44 PM
His donation list certainly bears a striking resemblance to ACORN’s list of registered voters.
Ronnie on October 21, 2008 at 6:00 PM
Yep.
Americans give about twice as much (as a percent of GDP) as Brits (who are the most generous Europeans) and three times as much as other European countries’ citizens.
According to Philanthropy UK:
“The most wealthy 10% account for about half of all individual giving in the USA; in Britain it is only a fifth.”
“American households with annual incomes over $200,000 give 7.4% to charity. UK households with similar income give 1.2%”
Let’s eat the rich (where’s Grue when you need him?). It won’t have a deleterious effect on our universities, hospitals, patient support groups, women’s shelters, rape crisis hotlines, AIDS research efforts, zoos, museums….
Oh, and while we’re at it, let’s promise everyone universal health care and a college education.
Y-not on October 21, 2008 at 6:58 PM
I took his advice and voted today, but I don’t think he was talking to me.
SoldiersMom on October 21, 2008 at 7:46 PM
From his 150 million clams, Obama will be giving every college rec room a wide screen t.v. “so that they will be able to enjoy this historic election“, not as a voter bribe.
profitsbeard on October 21, 2008 at 11:18 PM
This way, Soros can give ten thousand $199 checks, & no one will know.
jgapinoy on October 21, 2008 at 11:56 PM
Maybe they do not want people seeing their name on the list then checking their crdeit card and wondering why there is a payment to Obama listed.
davod on October 22, 2008 at 3:32 AM
Obama ‘admits’ Kenyan birth?
Campaign doesn’t respond to claims in lawsuit over birth certificate
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78671
AdrianS on October 22, 2008 at 10:42 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2