Obama takes control of DNC fundraising
Barack Obama has been the presumptive Democratic nominee for two days but is already changing the party from within. He has instructed the committee to accept his proposal of denying funds from PACs and lobbyists, among growing insider concern about the DNC’s lackluster fundraising. The move not only unifies Obama’s policy with the party but stabs at McCain’s lobbyist ties.
The Republican National Committee has raised twice as the DNC’s 77.6 million this year, and has ten times more than the DNC’s 4.4 million on-hand cash. Leaders hope Obama’s fundraising knack will translate for more funds for the Convention in August.
News Observer
Obama prepared to help Clinton with debt
Barack Obama and second-place finisher Hillary Clinton appear to be reconciling after a bloody 16-month primary season. An Obama campaign advisor says Obama will help Clinton pay back the $20 million dollar campaign debt, including 11.4 million she owes herself.
According to the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, Clinton must pay the loan back by the Democratic Convention or she’ll only be able to repay a fraction. Though Obama can’t directly donate from his fund experts predict they will both reach out to Obama’s maxed out donors.
Bloomberg news
Clinton to end her bid
At the same time, a Clinton campaign issued a statement last night announcing that Hillary will voice her support for Obama and end her bid on Saturday. Aides say she originally wanted to wait but by Thursday had been convinced to back down.
“Senator Clinton will be hosting an event in Washington, D.C., to thank her supporters and express her support for Senator Obama and party unity,” said a chief strategist.
The tide turned as Obama declared himself the nominee Tuesday night and soon created a three person vice-president selection group, including longtime supporter Caroline Kennedy. Many Clinton supporters like former Vice President Walter Mondale expressed support for Obama after Tuesdays primaries, which may have prompted her exit.
NY Times
June 5, 2008
1. 36 million people voted in the Democratic presidential primary. Eventually the shock of loss will wear off and most Hillary supporters will support the Democratic nominee. Just the thought of McCain should keep most in line with Obama.
2. Money. Obama has raised over $235 million during the course of his campaign. Money talks, especially when that money comes from more than a million and a half donors.
3. A majority of the country says we’re heading in the wrong direction. McCain and Obama claim they’re about change, but when you vote with Bush 95% of the time and go fundraising with him…it doesn’t help.
4. Fair media coverage. The media hasn’t attacked McCain too much since he got the nomination. The media also loves talking about Obama, whether in a good or bad tone. After the nasty primary race they’re not much more the media can accuse Obama of.
5. Different policies. One reason the primary was so nasty was because Clinton and Obama have nearly identical platforms. Obama and McCain have almost polar opposite platforms. The general election will seem a cake-walk when Obama doesn’t have to rely on personal attacks.
6. Volunteers. Obama has a national network of volunteers, the reason for his overwhelming caucus victories. With the nation in full primary swing, momentum has swung to Obama, and it’ll stay that way.
June 4, 2008
Obama makes history
Barack Obama addressed a roaring crowd yesterday as he declared himself the Democratic presidential candidate after passing the 2,118 delegate threshold. Obama weathered an improbable 17-month long campaign against once likely nominee Hillary Clinton. He praised the New York senator for her hard work and tenacity, as she pledged to unify the party without actually stating she was dropping out.
Obama’s delegate total kicked off the general election, as Republican presumptive nominee John McCain admitted either candidate would bring change. “But the choice is between the right change and the wrong change, between going forward and going backward.”
Obama responded quickly with a similar tone, attacking McCain for supporting Bush’s policies.
“It’s not change when John McCain decided to stand with George Bush 95 percent of the time, as he did in the Senate last year. It’s not change when he offers four more years of Bush economic policies that have failed to create well-paying jobs. … And it’s not change when he promises to continue a policy in Iraq that asks everything of our brave young men and women in uniform and nothing of Iraqi politicians.”
The first-term Illinois senator addressed 17,000 fans in a St. Paul stadium, where the GOP convention will be held in September. The historic campaign kicked off with a surprising Iowa victory on January 3. That began a firefight between the two popular candidates, Obama standing for change and Clinton standing for experience. Obama attracted the support of blacks, younger voters, more liberals and more well-off voters while Clinton was popular among Hispanics, working-class and women.
Clinton stopped shorting of formally ending her campaign as she spoke in New York. She admitted she was open to vice-president during a conference call with a New Mexico representative.
There are mixed numbers about the strength of this “dream ticket.” Critics said he needs Hispanic, southern and female support and point to candidates like New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Nebraskan Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, Virginia Senator Jim Webb and Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano.
Huffington Post
Yahoo
June 4, 2008
This was in the Indy Star today:
Fraud: “deceit, trickery or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.”
The HBO movie “Recount” tells the story from the Democratic Party point of view that the 2000 presidential election was improperly won by George W. Bush because of the trickery of his fellow Republicans and the Supreme Court. That has been shown to be untrue by no less a source than the reliably liberal and pro-Democratic New York Times, but facts rarely influence propaganda.
Here’s a better example of fraud straight from the donkey’s mouth that you can bet will never be told on film. It comes courtesy of 12-term Congressman Paul Kanjorski. During a town meeting last August in his Pennsylvania district, Rep. Kanjorski made a remarkable statement about the 2006 election in which Democrats recaptured the majority. Rep. Kanjorski acknowledged that he and his fellow Democrats “sort of stretched the facts” about their intention to end the war in Iraq and bring American troops home.
A video of his remarks, now on YouTube, shows Kanjorski explaining that Democrats pushed the rhetoric about the war “as far as we can to the end of the fleet – didn’t say it, but we implied it – that if we won the congressional elections we could stop the war.” Democrats also promised to bring down gas prices if they won a majority. That worked out well, didn’t it?
“Now anybody who’s a good student of government,” continued Kanjorski in a condescending manner, “would know it wasn’t true.” I wonder how non-students of government felt about that insult? “But you know,” he said, “the temptation to want to win back the Congress – we sort of stretched the facts.”
Many politicians “stretch the facts” at some point in their careers, but this was more than that. While Republicans do the same thing on another level – like campaigning for spending cuts and then outspending Democrats when they become a majority – what Kanjorski has admitted to is outright fraud. Those who don’t believe in the war, which includes some Republicans, had a right to believe that if they cast their votes for Democrats in the 2006 election, a Democratic congressional majority would end the war. Instead, while huffing and puffing about it, Democrats have continued to approve funds for Iraq and Afghanistan, attaching numerous pet pork projects. Pork covers a multitude of sins.
Some Democrats have made their careers by lying about Republicans and their attempts at necessary reforms of Social Security. My Democratic friend, Bob Beckel, likes to tell the story of his mother who lived in Florida and called him after seeing campaign commercials, which he produced, that claimed Republicans were about to eliminate Social Security. Beckel says he told her, “Mom, don’t worry about it. You vote for Democrats on Tuesday and come Wednesday your Social Security will be back.”
Kanjorski has taken cynicism about Washington and politicians to a new and lower level.
No wonder the disapproval rating of Congress is higher than it is for President Bush.
In cases of fraud, the victim usually has redress in the courts. With political fraud, voters must seek redress at the polls. They should start – but not stop – with Rep. Kanjorski, who is faced with his first competitive race since 2002. But he has a lot of co-conspirators and even one who is not a “good student of government” ought to know when they’ve been duped by fraudulent political practices.
Cal Thomas attacks the Democrats for not living up to their election promise. The Democrats have the President fighting them, who vetoes every bill that tries to fulfill their election promise of getting out.
By attacking Democrats for lying, Thomas ignores the bigger, more fraudulent elephant in the room. Does Bush saying “The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons” (9/26/02) sound familiar? Or maybe McCain’s claim that “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” (9/4/02) or Rumsfeld’s infamous “I can’t tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks or five months. But it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that.” (11/14/02)
Kanjorski honestly admits his party lied. Bush lies about lying by blaming faulty intelligence. “Intelligence communities all across the world shared the same assessment. And so I was disappointed to see how flawed our intelligence was.” (5/13/08) This contradicts a late September CIA testimony that found “no credible information that Baghdad had foreknowledge of the 11 September attacks or any other al-Qaeda strike.” Is that double fraud?
May 31, 2008
