The Republican National Committee's complaint about "foreign" contributions to Barack Obama's presidential campaign is a directed, political tactic designed to raise questions about Obama's foreign-ness and otherness.
Discuss.
« Whodathunkit? | Main | Over The Top Palin Reactions (And A Biden Bonus) » Discuss.05 Oct 2008 03:43 pm TrackBackListed below are links to weblogs that reference Discuss.:
» RNC to file fundraising complaint against the Obama campaign from Sister Toldjah Comments (118)
"Discuss" what, exactly? To ask this question is to know the answer to it. There is no GOP "campaign" - merely a series of disembodies, episodic feints, slights, attacks, and misdirections. It's quite something, isn't it? Pathetic (and dangerous). But don't call them out on it, or that might, um, sabotage journalistic, uh, oh idunno why . . . 
Of course it is. As is the fact that Palin never mentions Ayers by name. she pointedly says "domestic terrorists" conveniently conjuring up Muslim 9/11 terrorists. Check the transcripts and then ask her why she never mentions the word "Ayers" or "Vietnam protest.". Instead she acts as if the guy is a current terrorist.
All of these tactics must be seen in the overall present situation of the Republican campaign: The American voters have begun to solidify their vote for November and it is not the Republican ticket; McCain has made dubious decisions that question his leadership skills (very erratic); the Republican Vice Presidential candidate is certainly not qualified for a national position (degree does not denote you are educated); polly-parrot talking points delivered in a commentator does not signify a debater;husband belonged, up to this year, in a radical Alaskan group. The list could go on and on, however, these moves are the acts of a desperate campaign. American are smarter than that and see through all the nonsense, unfortunately the Republican ticket is not. They will suffer the potential downside to this---loss of the election.
For what it is worth, as an American living abroad, who has made several legal donations to the Obama campaign, I have received phone calls from the Obama campaign verifying passport numbers and eligibility to donate. From my personal experience, there is no justification to this story unless the Republicans plan to paint any American who works abroad as being "foreign." Brilliant.
Of course this is a desperate tactic to draw attention away from the failing McCain campaign and its failed (and dangerous) policies (i.e., the same policies as the current Bush administration). There's no substance, just accusation. The press and the people should ignore it.
Is there any doubt? Looks like that's the theme of the week for them, if not the remaining campaign. Distract and distort, and hope the media and public take the bait. They'll try to win the news cycle and scare independent voters, and it's up to Obama's team to punch back.
What a silly thing to discuss. Everything is a political tactic, for one, and speculating as to specific motives is pointless; virulent anti-Republicans (like those above) are going to talk about how it's just another example of how low McCain will stoop. Of course they will. What they're not talking about, I see, is whether or not the claim has merit. That's the more pertinent issue, despite the question posed, not only because it's inherently important, but because it renders all this predictable "just another smear!" silliness moot.
True. And as Cokie Roberts said, Hawaii is kinda foreign.
Duhhh.
Such complaints are common in the political world. They come and they go as the FEC, in time, makes a decision and wrongly donated dollars are returned or given to a charity. The process is long drawn out. The RNC, as is being reported, is considering, meaning they hope for more media coverage until they decide to file or not. Obama continues to cite economic issues the McCain campaign is ignoring and the RNC news is overshadowed which becomes another failed Rovian strategy.
Mr. F, Lou has it right. There probably are some contributions in Obama's coffers, as well as McCain's, that violate FEC rules. Both sides will return them as they're found. It's normal procedure, especially in these days of online contributions. There's no story here unless one side refuses to identify and return illegal funds.
All I have to say is: "Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said the campaign has no idea who the individuals are and has returned all the donations, using the credit-card numbers they gave to the campaign." THEY RETURNED THE MONEY! When Palin returns the bridge to nowhere money, she can gripe.
This really does seem like a coordinated effort by both the RNC and the McCain to do what Mark Penn wanted to do in the primary. The only problem is, it is too late in the game to try and define Obama- amongst the undecideds who actually matter- as some kind of radical. Bear in mind that this whole stunt along with Palin's Ayers injection still does not take away the fact that there is still this thing called the economy. For the McCain camp, these "he's not one of us" tactics are all they have left because they hope it will fire up their base. In the end, it won't help them win for three reasons: (1) elections are won with the middle of the road voters and not just the base. These tactics may move a small number, but it's a good assumption that those voters wouldn't have voted for Obama anyways given they are so spooked by all this. (2)The Ayers connection was brought up months ago in the primary means doesn't have any shock value and people won't really care about supposed guilt by association that has already been explained. (3) The economy. At a time where there are these kind of problems and when most voters see Obama as better able to fix it, attempts to paint Obama as foreign this late makes them look desperate and unable to address what's going on with voter's wallets.
"Mr. F, Lou has it right. There probably are some contributions in Obama's coffers, as well as McCain's, that violate FEC rules. Both sides will return them as they're found. It's normal procedure, especially in these days of online contributions. There's no story here unless one side refuses to identify and return illegal funds." Agreed on all counts. No campaign can avoid these problems. But as you imply, there's a story when they refuse to identify the funds. From Newsweek: "This summer, watchdog groups asked both campaigns to share more information about its small donors. The McCain campaign agreed; the Obama campaign did not. "They could've done themselves a service" by heeding the suggestions, said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics." Agree, disagree, whatever, but it seems to me that they could squash these complaints pretty easily if they wanted to. Now, if I wanted to engage in the sort of knee-jerk partisanship that most of the other commenters are exhibiting, I would simply declare this as a sign of Obama's guilt and corruption. Instead, I'll simply say that it should clearly be looked into.
McCain and his friends from RNC are despicable.
Won't work. Won't gain traction.
I'd rather discuss the fact that North Carolina is listed as a toss-up on Karl Rove's map!
Notice how many people are basically calling this a smear, despite the obvious fact that none of them have the slightest idea whether or not the claim is true or false. I'll wager most of them didn't even read the articles in question. It's simply shameful to dismiss something out of hand which you know nothing about, and its transparent that it's being done by people who simply would rather it not be true. The comments are simply a blanket declaration that, because it's negative, and it's about their guy, it can't be true, and is just another example of their operating theory about the opposition. Delightful how every news item reinforces an existing view, isn't it? Here's a novel idea: investigate the claim. And if you have nothing to contribute other the fact that you think every accusation from the other side is a smear, then I'm sorry to inform you that you don't actually have anything worthwhile to say.
It is clear that the international attention to this election is at an all-time historical high. Foreign journalists' reporting on the election in favor of Obama is, similarly, at an all-time hysterical high. There is equally little doubt that foreign governments want Obama to become president, and the more hostile the government, the more they want to assure a certain outcome. There can be no question that this type of interest will result in foreigners trying to donate to the campaign in any possible fashion. Those same Volks believe their justification in "having a say" in US government outweighs the niceties of US electoral legality. Now, that Obama would like to take money from anyone he can -- most politicians would. His own interest, his own campaign's interest, in making such illegal contributions particularly onerous is vanishingly small. It would behoove the Bam Camp to guarantee the legitimacy of all its donations, particularly those from abroad. And yet the Bam Camp prefers not to. It's a fair question for the RNC to ask, especially since the press is uninterested in reporting critically on Obama.
Marc -- So, you voted for McCain anyway? Even though you suspect he's resorting to tactics like this? Disappointing. Peter
In the spirit of full disclosure, I would like to inform readers that I sent off my postal ballot for John McCain this week. I may be in a swing state on the election day, hence the early vote. responses below rather than to my email, please. Posted by Marc Ambinder | October 4, 2008 3:18 PM
"Notice how many people are basically calling this a smear, despite the obvious fact that none of them have the slightest idea whether or not the claim is true or false. I'll wager most of them didn't even read the articles in question." That's what happens when you lie a lot. People stop listening to you. It's a good reason not to lie.
Point out Obama is taking foreign contributions = racist. Obama ad with 2 white celebrities = racist. Obama ad with a black man = racist. Obama ad with white ex-terrorist = racist. Make a comparison to Jesse Jackson = racist. Apparently campaigning against Obama is racist. Please keep making these characterizations and lets see what happens.
Way too much nuance.
Terrorists everywhere are pro BO.
No, we conservatives just don't like other countries interfering in our elections. But never mind that, any and all criticism of Obama is racist.
Thanks for the full disclosure Marc about voting for McCain. It explains so much in regards to your bloggin' this year and why many times I left shaking my head. How can someone so smart be so dumb?
Setting up for attacks on immigration, esp. drivers licenses
As a point of information, what criticisms of Obama or his campaign are allowed as being non-racist? It seems that many of the complaints Republicans had against Clinton, Gore, or Kerry, when brought up against Obama, are being cast as racist. (From the right, of course. Any complaints from the left that he's not leftist enough or not black enough will not raise racism charges. Besides, I haven't heard any complaints from the left. Any disaffected Kucinich supporters care to weigh in?)
Hmm. Perhaps. It is illegal for a U.S. politician to accept campaign contributions. We can all agree that a President taking money from lobbyists is not a good thing, regardless of the source of the money. If this is true, then Mr. Ambinder's discussion point makes sense only if one equates "law-breaking" with "otherness." Imputing this perspective to Republicans does not change the fact that you Mr. Ambinder, are a racist, because it is you that associates Obama's status as an "other" with criminality. To paraphrase Nietzsche, careful when you play the race card, lest the race card play you.
I was going to leave a comment, but it was probably racist, so I guess I'll just shut up.
Imagine if McCain had even a photo op let alone a coffee to open his campaign with a former head of the KKK, someone who was unrepentant about it. Then imagine if McCain claimed that it was no big deal because the guy hasn't lynched anyone in like 30 years and besides, he was just trying to not make waves with the far right of some political machine in his neighborhood. At some point or another, the Left is going to have to come to grips with just how hateful violent and evil people like Ayers and others on the far left were and are.
Raising a legitimate issue is not an attack--it's a critique. And I see nothing desperate or craven in raising this legitimate issue. Conversely, the immediate rush to label every criticism of Obama as racist . . . now THAT smacks of desperation, in my opinion. Desperation to avoid engaging any criticism on the merits, but rather to attack the critic. your mileage may vary.
Is this what we are to expect from an Obama Adminstrtion? Every disagreement with his policies and every question about his actions or ethics are to be met with cries of "Racists!"?
Yes, race ought to be a bar to questions of campaign integrity. Because of the content of the character.
Ouch, these comments have gotten ugly in a hurry. A note to the commenters: When Republicans pushed the message that John Kerry "seemed French" it was xenophobic bullshit. When they push similar lines of attack against Obama it is still xenophobic bullshit. Pointing that out is not "playing the race card." In fact, the only people who have brought up race in this conversation, so far as I can tell, are conservatives who are whining about being called racists.
As a concerned, progressive political operative, I'm worried that our colleagues in the media are getting off message by playing the race card too soon. Doing so threatens to dilute its power and may damage the Obama brand (it's "change we can believe in," not "shut up racist Republithugs"). We appreciate the help, but for the love of the One, please wait until we tell you the play the card! David P.S. Calling our guy "foreign" doesn't win votes in Pennsylvania.
I'm reading a number of people saying "investigate the claim" before making a judgment. Well, folks, what do you think the FEC does? Some private group may want to do the FEC's job redundantly, but I fail to see how this can possibly benefit a campaign. In light of this, the only reason for the RNC to bring this up is to make political hay. Their intention is to cast Mr. Obama as some sort of Manchurian Candidate and hope to stoke enough prejudice and nationalism to keep people from the polls.
"That's what happens when you lie a lot. People stop listening to you. It's a good reason not to lie." Except that this has been the response virtually the entire campaign. And it's circular to blame them for "lying" when whether or not they're lying is what's in dispute to begin with. That said, it's good of you to basically concede that people are judging this issue without any interest in or regard for whether or not it's true. Thanks for the concession.
BS, Leo. Any reasonable person would respond the same. The inquiry is not racist on its face and to infer that is is intolerable. Becoming frustrated at the accusation is natural and reasonable.
There is an easy test to know if you are a Liberal or a Conservative. Focus on avoiding accountability because you believe others as incapable; you are a Liberal. Look at others as capable and accountable... you're working toward a strong, productive and Conservative society. When you believe others as capable, nothing further is required of you. It's only when I see you as incapable that all the compassion comes out and drowns out any vestige of a productive America.
I'm sure the Obama campaign would welcome a thorough investigation into its many for4eign donations as a concrete way to discredit those racist Republicans. It must be obvious to the casual observer that Obama's foreign donations are nothing unusual in either the amount nor number compared to those of Bush, Clinton or Kerry. Are they? Nor are the amounts contributed under $200 in any way unusual. Nor are the reported number of donations by the same individual. For example if one individual donated a thousand times to the Bush campaign, what reasonable individual might say something that wasn't kosher was going on. But surely these are all evidence of a racist mindset designed to detract from the details of Obama's campaign and his comprehensive proposals on taxation, defensive, national security, healthcare, foreign policy, domestic policies, beyond the "we ain't Bush" soundbites. But to the extent that we get the same old stonewalling and non recognition of these issues to focus on 20 year old DUI claims the credibility of Obama's camapgin remains as credible and sound as Biden's dabate performance. Res ipsa loquitur.
YOU. PEOPLE. ARE. AMAZING. Racist is pointing out he is black. AYERS IS A TERRORIST. Since when do we have to qualify the skin color or religious orientation of a TERRORIST? Is there no end to the goal post moving? Can you publish the rule book? No? That is because you add new rules every single day, hour by hour... THIS IS A STRETCH. Criticize him for being dork the week of the first debate. NOT BEING A RACIST.
I'm glad they're pulling this out. Anything that further digs the hole they've already dug for themselves is good by me. This won't gain any traction this late in the race and unless they have a bombshell no one has seen before, this thing is over and they know it. The fact that they're using Palin to smear Obama tells me all I need to know about her political future. She has none as no serious political contender can go this negative, be part of the losing ticket and hope to come back 4 years later. Her being the future of the party was always a joke.
"...a directed, political tactic designed to raise questions about Obama's foreign-ness and otherness." The ONLY "foriegn" and "other" of import in this complaint is the nationality of the currency funding Obama's campaign. Working to DEFLECT this matter only reinforces the questionable nature of Obama's funding. The righteous indignancy of this author's words only reinforces the artificiality of what m i g h t be called liberal "logic".
Instead of whining racism and carrying Obama's water, why don't you do some real investigating and debunk the charges, if they're untrue? Or is investigating any legitimate issue about Obama racist in and of itself?
Any informed person knows that every terrorist organization and enemy nation state in the world is looking forward to an Obama Presidency. It would come as no surprise at all if some of those have funnled money to his campaign. You are an ass-clown for attempting to label concerns about this as "racism". Not only that, you are a traitor.
So who is Mr. Good Will and why has he donated nearly $20,000 to Obama in small contributions?
Just another case of the people who work at the Atlantic getting insane and stupid. Y'all need to step away from Excitable Andy.
Jane, yes, I've noticed as an observer (I'm Australian) that there are too many Americans on the one side of the equation pulling the race card (I could probably quickly get a collection of statements from Obama/Obama staffers doing that each time Obama is criticised) Here's a black American explaining what is not a race issue (and which is actually quite funny as well). Might not be suitable for sensitive types.
"[I]t's circular to blame them for "lying" when whether or not they're lying is what's in dispute to begin with." The Republican party, and McCain in particular, have lost credibility with the American people. It's a result of a pattern of conduct over many years. Perhaps in a perfect world, people would analyze each and every claim that is made by each side, but in the real world most people don't have time for that. So they judge which messages to investigate further based on which messages come from credible messengers. And Republicans are no longer credible messengers. The Republicans are becoming like telephone solicitors. Telephone solicitors may say some things that are true from time to time, but most people don't much care about that--they just ignore them or hang up. They are discredited the minute they open their mouths because telephone solicitation has a long history of being obnoxious and deceptive. The same thing is happening to the Republican party. And it's their own fault. "BS, Leo. Any reasonable person would respond the same. The inquiry is not racist on its face and to infer that is is intolerable. Becoming frustrated at the accusation is natural and reasonable." No one said it was racist. It's an attempt to paint Obama as foreign, just as calling Kerry French was an attempt paint Kerry as foreign. It was transparent then and it's transparent now. The only people who have made this about Obama's race are conservatives who want to accuse people of "playing the race card." So let's be clear here, assuming Marc's calling anyone anything in this thread he's calling them nativists, or a know-nothings, or a xenophobes. Not racists.
Edited last paragraph: So let's be clear here, assuming Marc's calling anyone anything in this thread he's calling them nativists, or know-nothings, or xenophobes. Not racists.
To Kasper Hauser: You bring up an excellent point that everyone here who's either on the fence or voting for Sen. Obama should think about: Consider an Obama presidency. I think everyone (Dems and Reps) can agree that he is left of center. As a result, he's going to push for legislation that probably tries to help the lower class (healthcare, welfare-type programs, etc). Although he may have good intentions, I believe in less government and more personal responsibility. Republicans feel the same way and will want to block this type of leg. from getting through. If the Obama campaign and the MSM (Ass. Press, etc) can find racism in Sarah's recent remarks, how do you think they'll react when his programs get stopped. I look forward to the day when we're able to elect a black president, but Sen. Obama may actually set the country back 30 or so years regarding race. I see signs of it already I'm not crazy about McCain either, but no one on the good side of sanity can claim that he's dishonest or qualified. Sure, his campaign folks come out with the negative ads. That's just the nature of the campaign beast these days. Take a good hard look at Obama's campaign and what we don't know (Ayers, Rezko, college transcripts, Freddie/Fannie, foreign donations etc etc etc). McCain may not have the bells and whistles to wow a country, but I don't believe he'll drive this country apart.
Well, we all know that any criticism (even valid criticisms about possibly illegal campaign donations) is racist. What's there to discuss?
Hey folks no matter what we do the left wing media is going to call us racist so we all might as well vote for the old white guy. At least that way we can annoy the folks at the Atlantic.
I'm not even going to respond to this "article" as I don't want to be described as racist.
Let us never forget, the *real* scandal is Trig Palin's birth. Well, at least according some at the Atlantic.
RNC's complaint is legit. Until recently, one didn't have to prove US citizenship to donate to the Obama campaign.
They used the same tactic against Gore.
Asking questions is RACIST!!! EVEN IF ITS ABOUT RACISM! Let's get back to non-racist questions, like whether or not Trig is a cyborg from the 23rd century where Palin IV is president for 8 terms in a row.
Elroy Jetson,
Everything is racist. Just like the old Mojo Nixon song about Elvis being everywhere, any criticism of the messiah, the "One," the person some people worship as a God, is racist. So yes it's racist. Everything is racist. It's also TRUE. Hamas operates a phone bank for Obama, raising money, as detailed in the New York Times (a racist newspaper). Written by a (racist) white (but I repeat myself, racist) guy. It's all racist. But Rev. Wright is OK. He's Black. Yeah big surprise, a Muslim-friendly guy who's advisor Samantha Power fantasized about US forces dismantling Israel to make Hamas the rulers there, would get LOTS of money from Hamas ... and the Saudis. Alternative Energy = Saudi oil dependence for generations. Since you can't run planes, trains, and autos/trucks on that stuff. But don't forget -- RACIST!
Was there some evidence that the Republicans had a different strategy--talking up their economic expertise maybe? No? Then yes, the "he hangs out with people who aren't like you, so he's a weird unAmerican foreigner," as seen from Palin today, the RNC above, and of course my adorable fellow commenters on the right in this very thread, is what they've got, and they'll be going with it for another 4 weeks.
Discuss? How about, It's illegal to accept campaign contributions from foreigners. McCain and Hillary Clinton, both, had strict screening of any contributions from overseas. Obama doesn't.
I'm beginning to think that Americans really *want* to elect Barack Obama.. they want to believe in his hopeful message and they want a president who is calm, compassionate, and smart. They just need to feel comfortable with him, since he does, indeed, look different than other presidents and hasn't been on the national scene for very long. This is why the polls have been so close until now, despite all the favorables for Democrats. It takes people a while to feel comfortable with their potential elected officials. This week, I think, people crossed that comfort threshold en masse, saying "Yes, we'll go there with you, because you're all we have." Now, are they going to cross back because the two people they don't really want to elect, and who they no longer really trust, are calling him names? I think people will look at the source of these attacks (a completely unqualified VP candidate calling a well-qualified presidential candidate "a pal of terrorists"?) and see these attacks, indeed, as laughable and desperate.
Deborah I'm glad I don't hang out with unrepentant terrorists. They are surely "different" than me. I'd even venture to say "unAmerican". Glad Obama's clinched that .2% of the terrorist demographic, along with the Atlantic readers.
Yeah. It's racist to point out that Senator Obama illegally is receiving campaign contributions from areas like the middle east. That's the ticket.
"The Newsweek report says that earlier this year the Obama campaign returned $33,000 to two Palestinian brothers in the Gaza Strip who had bought T-shirts in bulk from the campaign's online store -- purchases that count as campaign contributions. The brothers had listed their address as 'Ga.,' which the campaign took to mean Georgia rather than Gaza." From the Washington Post link. I'm sold. Obviously there could be no other improper contributions. I denounce myself as racist for even considering it.
"McCain and Hillary Clinton, both, had strict screening of any contributions from overseas. Obama doesn't." And how, exactly, did they do that? This is the form on McCain's website RIGHT NOW: You check a box, and pronto, there is your contribution.
This thread should be archived for posterity. I don't think you could invent a better example of conservatives using the "race card" accusation as a bludgeon. I know you guys really *want* to be called racists. It would be very helpful for you if we could make this election into a referendum on whether "black folks are too sensitive about this stuff." But that's not what this is about. This is about a tactic that Republicans have been using for decades. It's slimy innuendo that was wrong last election and is still wrong today.
And by the way: yes it is racist to accuse someone of doing something you have no evidence of just because he doesnt look like you. And, as we've seen several times here, people are willing to outright lie in order to spread those accusations. I ask again, where is McCain's screening of foreign donations that so many have alluded to so far?
when you collect $25 or less you don't have to report it, but when people send in a combined total of $11,000 & $28,000 in incriments of $25 using foreign C.Cards over the internet and the Campaign doesn't report it people will want answers beyond finger pointing. these two examples pale in comparison to the hight volume already known to the FEC. There is a reason the One has smashed all records raising over 450 million and its not because 2.5 million americans have each given $180 as the campaign is claiming. Besides he lied when he said he was going to follow the new rules and take public money - 84 million - what makes you think he is not capable of telling another lie?
Okay, I think people on this post don't know the backstory here. This isn't some new desperate measure from the RNC - if anything, it's a shock it took them this long to ask for an investigation, when an investigation has already been going on in the blogging community for a few months now. We know the story about the $30k+ to Gaza, and the fact that Obama says he gave the money back (although there is no actual evidence of this other than his say-so), but this is a tiny part of the issue. For one thing, Obama's campaign does not have the transparency on this issue as the McCain campaign. The McCain campaign has made available all of the information for ALL of its donors. The Obama campaign has not released any info on its Another thing, with respect to foreign donations, the Obama campaign (until this story first broke) did not follow the same procedure as McCain, Hillary, and the other top candidates. McCain and Hillary require something like a faxed scan of your passport. Obama required nothing other than you TELLING them you were an American. In all phases of the donation process, it's easier to fraudulenty donate to Obama than any of the other campaigns (I haven't even brought up all of the issues... just some of them).
Let's just say NOTHING can be said about Obama unless it is positive or else it's "racist," how's that?
"This is the form on McCain's website RIGHT NOW:" Here's what's on Obama's site: Check this box to confirm that the following statements are true and accurate: 1. I am a United States citizen or a lawfully-admitted permanent resident.
To forestall questions, here's the entire list: 1. I am a United States citizen or a lawfully-admitted permanent resident.
dlp,
Okay, here's discussion. Are you nuts? A complaint about foreign donations that come from foreigners in foreign countries is actually not about Obama's foreignness but about the illegal donations, which come from foreign sources, which is illegal. Would it be agist to complain about illegal donations from seniors organizations to McCain because he's a senior?
I assume nothing. I never say X or Y did, just that doing it is racism. If the shoe fits... Leo, Jeff This is an outright lie. McCain never requested passports or any documents. Its always been the same way as obama: check here if you are, and that is it.
"dlp" is a classic Obama supporter: Pronounce facts with absolute certainty, and then assume that since you seemed so certain that you must be telling the truth. Like how analysts noticed that during the VP debate, the more forceful and assured Biden acted the more likely he was to be lying or telling a half-truth. So dlp thinks by saying "This is an outright lie" and providing no evidence that he has debunked something. He hasn't. Here is a money quote from a Newsmax article on this from a little more than a week ago that I had bookmarked:
More than 1,400 of the overseas entries clearly were U.S. diplomats or military personnel, who gave an APO address overseas. Their total contributions came to just $201,680. But others came from places as far afield as Abu Dhabi, Addis Ababa, Beijing, Fallujah, Florence, Italy, and a wide selection of towns and cities in France. Until recently, the Obama Web site allowed a contributor to select the country where he resided from the entire membership of the United Nations, including such friendly places as North Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Unlike McCain’s or Sen. Hillary Clinton’s online donation pages, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently. Clinton’s presidential campaign required U.S. citizens living abroad to actually fax a copy of their passport before a donation would be accepted. With such lax vetting of foreign contributions, the Obama campaign may have indirectly contributed to questionable fundraising by foreigners."
Obama is taking money from anyone. Doesn't care where it comes from. He's going to be President because the watchdogs want him to win. Mr. Ambinder, he's all yours. And when he screws up, you and all your friends own it, too. Congratulations. It's the new version of the "ownership society." Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan and plenty of other people will be there with mops and buckets in 2012.
Are you illiterate, Jeff?
Yes, I am illiterate. You got me. I'll go crawl into my hole in shame. You have to love with Obama Youth scream that any substantive attack on Obama is the lowest political attack in the history of mankind, but attacking back with silly personal insults is perfectly kosher.
There is no question that Obama's campaign has received MILLIONS in illegal donations, and that the campaign has tried to bury the story. There is also no question that they never gave any money back (if they did give money back) until these stories actually broke. They actually cite McCain giving back money as an argument of moral equivalence. Except the difference is that McCain's campaign gave back the money before any media were onto the story. All campaigns get illegal contributions. But most campaigns are proactive about looking for these and returning them. The Obama campaign has always looked the other way until the media figures it out. Remember back in the primaries when some people figured out that all sorts of young toddlers and children had given $2300 to Obama's primary effort (obviously paid for by parents who wanted to give over the max)? Same thing.
LOL @ the republicans actually believing that the origin of campaign contributions is somehow going to influence the results of this campaign. Ask the average American what the max amount they can donate to a candidate. Most probably couldn't answer. Now you want to delve into the gory details of who donated what and from where? *YAAAAWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNN*
I called you illiterate because you clearly could not grasp very simple text, something that is still evident in your latest reply. See? Simple. It is a lie that McCain has ever required passports or proof of citizenship to donate. It is a lie that McCain's screening process is stricter, since it is also visible for anyone to see that in both websites the only thing one has to do with regards to citizenship is checking a box. Anything else is besides the point, because I simply have made no claims about them. Ps: what are you getting with your McCain online action points?
Do you deny, Leo, that McCain's campaign is significantly more transparent with respect to donor information? Why do you suppose that is?
No, dlp, you're wrong. The McCain campaign follows up on foreign donors. They double-check. They also publish everything online, so other people can look into it. And even after bloggers had researched McCain's donations and found nothing illegal, the McCain campaign STILL went ahead and launched its own internal investigation to be absolutely certain that there were no illegal donations.
If Barack actually had to deal with an independent media that could spare a reporter every once in a while from their massive dumpster dive in Alaska that is attempting to determine if Sarah Palin ever got a parking ticket, he wouldn't be able to play dumb all the time and get away with it.
"In fact, the only people who have brought up race in this conversation, so far as I can tell, are conservatives who are whining about being called racists." Funny, it was Obama who said that he didn't look like all of those presidents on the bills. Yet it's the republicans who are racist. Modern Liberalism, its followers and their "feelings" have problems with fact.
Are you familiar with the RNC/McCain campaign's internal verification process of donors?
Jeff,
This is as much about a negative message about Obama as it is taking the spotlight off of a certain report due this week. |
Is this rhetorical, Marc? Of course it is. There's no place these filthy degenerates won't go. There's much more potential downside to this approach than they think.
Posted by Bill | October 5, 2008 3:55 PM