Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Obama and Biden Go Through Cash Like Water And Need More

When Barack Obama broke his promise to play by the rules of campaign finance reform and - unlike John McCain - not accept public financing, it really was a bonanza for him as he was able to raise untold millions of dollars from special interests, Wall Street, trial lawyers, foreign countries, unions, etc. "The One" had a great last month in raising nearly enough money to buy several small corporations. 

As it stands it appears "The Messiah" has pissed through all his cash (in the first part of this month the Democrats spent more than they raised - yea, not a surprise - and are now taking out a $10 million loan).

I guess that's why Joe the Stumbler Biden is asking folks for a little more PayPal love.  It would be funny but I am sure there are little old ladies out there who are going to go without something to send a few bucks Barack's way.

Please stand by for Obamabots to flood the comment section.  That's okay, that costs Obama $8 an hour.

Friend --


Last night, Barack took to the airwaves to make the case for real change. He used the time to tell the stories of ordinary people who need real solutions to their problems.


The presentation reached its finale with Barack addressing the nation live from Florida -- I've included the video of that moment below.


But right now, I need to ask you for help.


We just learned that the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee had a $20 million cash advantage on October 15th. That means we can expect to see a fierce blitz of negativity in the final days -- so-called "robocalls," mail pieces, and TV ads filled with smears and false attacks.


We can't let our opponents' low-road tactics prevail. To stand up to this last-minute spending spree, we need to step up our efforts.


Watch Barack's speech and make your first donation of $5 or more before it's too late

Labels: , , ,

14 Comments:

Blogger Spencer Martin said:

maybe you should just accept that the country is turning to the left. just enough or too far left. the right pull since the 1980s had its heyday, but has not been good lately.

yes, o'bama has spent a fortune, but this is what the country wants. so, if he has the money raised, we have to accept that this is what the majority wants.

i dunno, but it looks like you should give the guy a break and see what he can do.

October 30, 2008 4:45 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

I really did vet the guy. I really wanted to vote for him. But when I opened the box there was nothing but packing material inside. I got the feeling running up my leg but nothing clicked for me intellectually.

The old McGrumpus, well he would never give me any kind of feeling in my leg (his bloggin' daughter would though but that's TMI) but I just knew my wallet and my country will be a whole lot safer with Grandpa and his team in charge.

If it was Hillary, well I probably still couldn't vote for her, but I'd be far less scared than I am of Barry O and Stumblin' Joe.

October 30, 2008 5:06 PM  

Blogger Spencer Martin said:

i don't get what you mean.

October 30, 2008 5:15 PM  

Blogger Anonymous said:

Sarah Palin's favorite magazine, The Economist, has endorsed Obama.

"The Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence."

Also concerned about people's pocketbooks, the magazine went on to explain its reasoning.

It said that if the country had elected McCain instead of Bush in 2000, we likely wouldn't have had so many problems. But it said, as so many others have said, that the old John McCain disappeared.

It also called his choice of Sarah Palin "epitomised sloppiness." Noting his age, it asked what kind of corporation would choose a 72-year-old to head its operation.

October 30, 2008 5:17 PM  

Blogger JustSayAmy said:

Would you please? How did you vet him and come up with different results?

I think you're afraid of what the world will be like with an African American man, or a woman for that matter, as a president! The world will not fall apart, but you are predicting a collapse of the free world! That is not going to happen.

Whether Barak is going to be an effective president remains to be seen. But you should not be so dismissive of him. Give him a chance to bring young people, the people of the future, people like me, to the front and let us have a chance at running the country.

It won't be so bad. You shouldn't just hand things over to John MacCain and Sara Palin just because you think the other guy isn't qualified. I am not so sure that John and Sara are either.

October 30, 2008 5:22 PM  

Blogger Anonymous said:

If you want to talk about another "Bradley Effect," remember all of those dire predictions made by Sam Yorty and his supporters about what would happen to the city if we elected a black mayor.

Today's fear-mongering sounds almost identical. Back then it was that black extremist groups would rule the city, the Valley would get ignored, and on and on.

The job of a chief executive moderates people because (1) they want to get re-elected, (2) they want to carve out a place in history for themselves, and (3) they need to hammer out compromises in order to get anything done.

Higby, the United States will not suffer as much under Obama as it already has under Bush, which ranges from the lack of dignity that he brought to the White House, our worldwide dislike mainly because of the war, and our fall as the economic leader of the world.

Imagine if Bush set out to do the poorest job he could, would he have done anything differently?

So the question you must be asking yourself is if McCain were elected, would be getting the old maverick McCain, or this 2008 version that was built by the Bushites and his inability to control the tone and direction of his own campaign?

Which McCain would go to the White House?

October 30, 2008 5:54 PM  

Blogger Anonymous said:

Early postings by MS writers showed that one poll, IBD/TIPP, had McCain within 2 points of Obama nationally.

Other posters warned that this didn't come close to the results from all the other polls, and that the sampling and weighting used might have been faulty.

Now the Wall Street Journal spoke to the head of that firm and found that this was indeed the result of his mistakes. The poll severely underweighted the youth vote.

Mystery solved.

http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/mccain-and-the-youngest-voters-441/

October 30, 2008 6:09 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

Don't give me shit about not wanting to vote for a Black man.

I worked on the Tom Bradley campaign in 1982, had to take a lot of crap from racists, and saw what I thought was going to be a victory go down in flames.

Quite frankly, I've been working and voting for candidates of color before you were even born Amy. I see beyond that. I would in a minute vote for Colin Powell, Michael Steele, Lynn Swann, Condoleeza Rice, Rosario Marin, David Hernandez for President if any of them were running. In fact, I would love more than anything to see a Black man or woman become President. But not Barack Obama.

The guy is inexperienced, too unknown, his track record shows he's more about himself (like another Villaraigosa) and his views on taxation, the economy, foreign policy and homeland defense are wrong headed and most likely dangerous.

I encourage young people to vote but most don't. Most go for idealism. I know I was there, I was part of Youth for Mondale. I even phone banked for Bill Clinton because I thought he was my chance to have a JFK in my lifetime.

But sometime between Clinton's first blow job from Monica Lewinsky and the present day I grew up and learned we don't elect rock stars. We don't elect movements. We elect men and women who we trust have the integrity and expertise to properly hold the public trust we give them.

In America, we can respect, but should never revere our leaders.

And that's why I can not vote for Obama.

October 30, 2008 7:20 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

In other news, just hours after Joe the Stumbler asked me for just one last $5, I got another email from Ms. Obama asking for another just one last $5.

Did she want to order some caviar?

October 30, 2008 7:22 PM  

Blogger Jim Alger said:

Michael,

The link you have to support the false claim that Barack spent all his money states clearly the DNC NOT Barack is seeking the loan for SENATE races.

Why do you insist on publishing these untruths?

Barack NEVER agreed to accept public financing merely that he would like to if a deal could be struck to keep the 527's out. (Since they outspent Kerry by Millions four years ago)

I know it is an inconvenient truth, but MILLIONS of AMERICANS have donated to Barack. Truth is he HAS a "publicly funded" campaign as it is WE THE PEOPLE who have funded it. McCain wants the taxpayers to pay for it. Nice.

October 30, 2008 7:42 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

Jim - I thought you guys were for clean campaigns and public financing???

And here all the little people who have donated to the campaign:

Goldman Sachs $874,207
Microsoft Corp $714,108
Google Inc $701,099
JPMorgan Chase & Co $581,460
Citigroup Inc $581,216
National Amusements Inc $543,859
Time Warner $508,148
Sidley Austin LLP $492,445
Skadden, Arps et al $473,424
Wilmerhale Llp $466,679
UBS AG $454,795
Latham & Watkins $426,924
Morgan Stanley $425,102
IBM Corp $415,196

Dang - nearly half a mil from Latham and Watkins! Does that mean BO will support Home Depot?

October 30, 2008 7:48 PM  

Blogger Anonymous said:

First, I thought that one of the goals of campaign reform was to encourage lots of small donations. Obama's donations average $89 each. Anyone know the number for McCain?

Second, how many of those companies listed as Obama donors are also McCain donors?

Unlike individuals, who tend to give just to one candidate, lobbyists and politically smart companies hedge their bets by making sure they donate to the expected winner. There's too much at stake for them to gamble on a single candidate.

October 31, 2008 2:19 PM  

Blogger Donna Barstow said:

I cannot stand the ignorant people who say not voting for Obama is racist. Gah, shut up.

I was telling a friend recently, a big Obama supporter, that I had lots of ideas for Palin cartoons, but hardly anything for Obama. Because I'm afraid that it might be making fun of him. (Yes, political cartoons do that.) And I might be accused of being racist.

That's just not right, but that's the political climate now.

October 31, 2008 4:14 PM  

Blogger Anonymous said:

Donna:

I think you're being overly-cautious or sensitive.

Pick something about Obama that you can play with -- a quote, proposal, gaffe, image -- and go with it.

Of course there will be people who will criticize it because they have no sense of humor or because they don't want their candidate to be criticized, but you can't adjust your art and your form of expression to the lowest common demoninator.

Cartoonists are supposed make people feel a little uncomfortable, laugh, and hopefully engage in self-examination.

Why not do a cartoon about how some not dare criticize Obama for fear of being labeled a racist?

November 01, 2008 5:01 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement