The Limits of Obama’s Fundraising
[Guest post by DRJ]
If Obama’s extensive TV ads are any indication, he has a lot of cash to spend. Still, I wonder how much of that money is from questionable and foreign sources as revealed in this August 2008 article:
“Obama’s overseas (foreign) contributors are making multiple small donations, ostensibly in their own names, over a period of a few days, some under maximum donation allowances, but others are aggregating in excess of the maximums when all added up. The countries and major cities from which contributions have been received France, Virgin Islands, Planegg, Vienna, Hague, Madrid, London, AE, IR, Geneva,Tokyo, Bangkok, Turin, Paris, Munich, Madrid, Roma, Zurich, Netherlands, Moscow, Ireland, Milan, Singapore, Bejing, Switzerland, Toronto, Vancouver, La Creche, Pak Chong, Dublin, Panama, Krabi, Berlin, Geneva, Buenos Aires, Prague, Nagoya, Budapest, Barcelona, Sweden, Taipei, Hong Kong, Rio de Janeiro, Sydney, Zurich, Ragusa, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Uganda, Mumbia, Nagoya, Tunis, Zacatecas, St, Croix, Mississauga, Laval, Nadi, Behchoko, Ragusa, DUBIA, Lima, Copenhagen, Quaama, Jeddah, Kabul, Cairo, Nassau(not the county on Long Island,lol), Luxembourg (Auchi’s stomping grounds), etc,etc,etc,
Half a million dollars had been donated from overseas by unidentified people “not employed”.
Digging deeper, all sorts of very bizarre activity jumped at us. Dr and JJ continued to break it down and pull data from various sources. We found Rebecca Kurth contributed $3,137.38 to the Obama Campaign in 112 donations, including 34 separate donations recorded in one day,
How about this gibberish donor on the 30th of April in 2008.
A donor named Hbkjb, jkbkj
City: Jkbjnj Works for: Kuman Bank (doesn’t exist)
Occupation: Balanon Jalalan Amount: $1,077.23
or the donor Doodad, The # of transactions = 1,044
The $ contributed = $10,780.00
This Doodad character works for FDGFDGF and occupation is DFGFDG.”
There have been more questionable donors uncovered since this article was written almost 2 months ago. On the other hand, some of the money could be coming from real Americans like Steve and Rachel Larman:
“A North Kansas City couple has been left scratching their heads after they became the victims of a political scam.
Steve and Rachel Larman say a strange credit card charge appeared on their statement this month — a $2300 donation to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. The Larman’s say they don’t want this to be about their political affiliation, but they say they’re not about to give the Obama campaign any help from their pocketbook.
They said they notified Chase, their credit card bank, to report the fraud.
“(They) said that they had seen-they were familiar with this,” said Steve Larman. “It was fraud, they believe through telemarketing but they were going to be doing some more investigations.”
It would be nice to learn the truth about these donations but it will never happen, because transparency is not a principle Barack Obama believes in.
Jeeze Patterico, you guys need a new a narrative. I know there’s only a few weeks left and it’s time to throw everything at the wall, in case something sticks, but your guy is pretty vulnerable on this.AemJeff (fb31da) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:12 pm
There are no limits to fundraising when I can sit at my desk and donate $20 at a time to you for as long as I want …abcdefg hijklmn (not a Soros minion) (f7900a) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:14 pm
I wrote this post so it’s my narrative, not Patterico’s, and I like it. It’s not often you get to use the word Doodad in a post.DRJ (c953ab) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:18 pm
Heh. BTW, I missed the “Guest post” tag. Sorry about that.AemJeff (fb31da) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:20 pm
DRJ – Aem just wants to distract our attention away to the issues that matter, like following election law.JD (f7900a) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:21 pm
DRJ – expecting a Black Democrat to obey the law is racism – Big time.Perfect Sense (9d1b08) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:28 pm
How dare you accuse me of something illegal.
Obama’s camp previously said that they were returning the money. Why will they not disclose who that money came from in the first place, and why will the fuckin’ media not ask such a simple question.asdf ghjkl (f7900a) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:30 pm
You missed *three* guest post tags. We did everything but scream in your face.Patterico (e62d37) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:34 pm
Try and police my donashuns, beeyotches.zxc vbnm (f7900a) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:38 pm
I’m going to post on this subject when his fundraising reports come out next week.
Frankly, I think the truth is that the Obama campaign — as a commenter pointed out on one of my posts on this subject earlier this week — is simply buying tv spots on account without regard for whether they will raise enough money before election day to pay for it.
They are spending money they don’t have and that they haven’t raised, on the presumption that if they win, their after-the-fact fundraising will pay it off.
Its a collateral benefit to opting out. While McCain is constrained by the reality that he can only spend $84 million, and not a penny more, Obama is simply spending whatever he wants — like a guy with an unlimited credit card. He’ll worry about paying for it later.wls (c1b09d) — 10/14/2008 @ 9:55 pm
DRJ – The Doodad thing was suh-weeeet. Just sayin’.daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:07 pm
You may be right. If so, just imagine what will happen if Obama and the Democrats get control of the US government’s credit card. They’ll be a lot worse than George W. Bush.DRJ (c953ab) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:09 pm
We have the same sense of humor, eh?DRJ (c953ab) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:12 pm
I thought a general ‘E-donation’ was used for political donations, to protect the cardholder.
Foreign funding of Obama is no laughing matter, though. I think we’re all aware of why this election is so dangerous.
He does tend to promise anyone within earshot that he will win. I bet George Soros is already dreaming about pissing in the Rose Garden.Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:16 pm
I’ve seen 2 Obama ads tonight (California)! And I thought that was a Democrat lock. He must have money or great credit.
I guess all his new fans in Germany kicked in?Patricia (ee5c9d) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:25 pm
Since when did you become concerned about “transparency?”
We’ve been reading your posts here for years defending every act of secrecy that the current administration has engaged in…
A little bit of hypocrisy here and there is to be expected. You, my friend, are bathing in it.Syracuse! (b8c7e2) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:35 pm
Any Links! for that claim?DRJ (c953ab) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:38 pm
Before you answer, remember:
I asked for transparency in the last paragraph of a post on the Bailout.
I bemoaned the lack of transparency on the media’s love for Obama.
I applauded John McCain’s support for transparency in the media.
And I endorsed La. Gov. Bobby Jindal’s efforts to pass ethics laws that would increase transparency in state government.
How’s that for Transparency!?DRJ (c953ab) — 10/14/2008 @ 10:51 pm
Transparency efforts with al Quaeda versus transparency of funding for an American election should be easy to differentiate.Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe) — 10/14/2008 @ 11:04 pm
DRJ, do you think that a President Obama would double the deficit? $5 trillion to $10 trillion is tough work. I would hope Republicans would scream bloody murder and make sure a Democratic president didn’t do anything similar.
Can you imagine the justified outcry if a Democratic president started using taxpayer funds to buy equity in banks? It would unacceptable.
I hope Republicans start cleaning house.PC (b4b303) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:09 am
If there is no “transparency” to Obama’s donations, then where did this info come from?snuffles (677ec2) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:28 am
PC – Just remember when you cite that debt number that the Democrats wanted to spend more money than Bush. Complaining about it now smacks of a little hypocrisy on your part.daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:46 am
snuffles – The names come from the small part of the data which has been revealed idiotard. The largest part has not. Try to keep up.daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:47 am
daleyrocks, my point was that a Democrat would never be able to get away with what a Republican is doing and the Republicans would rightfully be blocking the things that are happening right now.PC (b4b303) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:55 am
PC – I think the fear is that traditional Democratic priorities would only worsen the current economic problems, causing a ballooning of the deficit and adding huge amounts to the debt by virtue of causing a huge reduction in tax collections.
There is no question that the GOP from 2002-2006 — at the urging of the Bush Administration — thought they could provide guns and butter, and that was a path to re-election.
The American population is smart enough to know foolishness when they see it, and they were punished for it.
But McCain was not on that bandwagon, so to associate him with the “Guns and Butter” crowd is unfair.
But the risk with Obama is that he will both increase spending AND reduce tax revenues by increasing marginal tax rates on middle and upper income earners.wls (c1b09d) — 10/15/2008 @ 1:56 am
Sounds like the Nigerian Scam artists are funding the entire election for the Big O. nothing to see here!The dude (6539b0) — 10/15/2008 @ 4:57 am
More diversions from those that consider truth just something to be used when convenient and twisted or ignored when not
.. Here is a truth you cant deny.. if the Republicans and Conservatives had not sold this country out over the past eight years , wrecked the economy, killed jobs, driven up the deficit and killed thousands of US soldiers and tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq in a fake war that only benefits the terrorists, failed to get Osama Bin Ladin, disgraced the US with torture ans secret imprisonment, attacked the Constitution, outed secret agents then covered up their crimes, failed to prevent the disgrace of the Katrina recovery, have at least attempted to prevent the attack on 9/11 when warned, fiddled in the face of the economic meltdown, deliberately sown hate and divisiveness among the fearful, ignorant and bigoted to win elections and in general if they had not risen to power with hate and lies, ruinous wars and voodoo economics, they would not be in a loosing position now desperately trying to shift the blame, and insisting like Sarah Palin that “we not look back!”.
They governed well they could now proudly run on their record instead of encouraging mobs to yell “kill Obama” and cry “Traitor”, “Treason” and more and busy themselves manufacturing phony outrages over trumped up charges and wallowing in self pity about the media in a pathetic effort to divert attention from their failed policies.
Republicans will destroy this country if that is what it takes for them to rule over the ruins.
Go ahead call me more names because that is all you have. You were given a chance and failed and you cant admit that even to yourself. How do you explain this blindness to facts? Pretty obvious to me.VietnamEraVet (543dfe) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:09 am
You are aware that just because it comes to you in a drug-induced haze, it doesn’t make it true, right?
Please, go back to DailyKos, Firedoglake, and Huffington…
You’ll be far happier there, surrounded by people who distort every even to make it the fault of republicans.
There are so many things wrong with your post I can’t even begin to dissect it. It is just a pile of Olbermann talking points mixed up with a dash of Code Pink rhetoric.Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:12 am
Hey Scott I see you cant refute what I say so you just make more charges.. Thanks for making my point!!VietnamEraVet (543dfe) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:18 am
Final Comment.. for today. Who was running the country for the past eight years when all these things happened?VietnamEraVet (543dfe) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:19 am
That’s because you didn’t really say any thing or make a point.CW Desiato (614aa7) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:22 am
VietnamEraVet, we’ve debunked your incoherent nonsense repeatedly in the past.SPQR (26be8b) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:24 am
Promise?CW Desiato (614aa7) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:27 am
All of our donations are belong to Obama.qwerty uiop (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:31 am
VEV – Step away from the keyboard. Those pills your doctor is always begging you to take … you should do so.
Bingo, daleyrocks. The idea that the Dems would have been a better, more responsible steward, is simply laughable.JD (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:33 am
Unfortunately we will probably never know where Obama’s contributions are coming from. We’re talking about a man who is disguising his government spending in the form of tax cuts. Just like he denied the fact that he heard the pastor of his lifelong church in Chicago sound more like a radical activist than a man of God over the past 20 years. This is just another sad example of the liberal illumaniti talking out of both sides of their mouth in an effort to be all things to all people. Get ready for more left-wing doubletalk with Obama. But the problem is that the talk will lead to enabling of millions of Americans who think that the government owes them something in life.Jeff (7761ee) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:42 am
I am sure WLS has noted it previously, but at what level of donation is disclosure mandatory, and at what level is Baracky disclosing? The trouble is not likely in what you can see, but what you cannot. If they are not reporting or disclosing donations under a certain amount, you can be assured that there is a Dem out there making donation after donation under that limit. We have seen this in what has been disclosed already.JD (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:45 am
For the Dems, the ends justify the means, and the Dems and their MSM surrogates want the White House at any cost, whether it be illegal fundraising, voter registration fraud, dis-enfranchising military overseas, Axelrod/Winner frauds, astro-turfing, slashing GOP tires, etc.
None of that matters.
Here’s where the decline of the MSM has hurt the GOP. If there were multiple large newspapers in all the major and mid-major cities, this would be an opportunity for them to expose their rivals. For example, in DC, the Evening Star closed its doors in 1981 after 130 years leaving only the Post as a national-level daily. The same for AP, etc.jim2 (a9ab88) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:52 am
I know he has raised a lot of money(legit or not) but how is it that he can flood all these markets with ads, not to mention 30-minute spots on TV? Are the media giving him a discount? How is Mccain so overwhelmed here? Sarah is raising tonnes of cash. Mccain campgin+ RNC have parity with the Obama. DNC is not raising that much. Can somebody explain it to me please?prom (1ad5d3) — 10/15/2008 @ 6:56 am
How about you state some supporting fact instead of fever-dreams?
The more you talk, the more I know you never went to Vietnam.Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 10/15/2008 @ 7:15 am
Scott – The Left has managed to turn the rules of logic on their head. They come by, drop a steaming pile of lovie right on the living room floor, and then demand that you refute their lies, rather than offering documentation or support for their position. The assertion of the lie, when done often enough, is used as proof of the lie. It is really bizarre.JD (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 7:19 am
#35, Jeff said that Obama’s left-wing double talk “…will lead to enabling of millions of Americans who think that the government owes them something in life.”
Should Obama win and Congress remain in liberal Democrat hands, the notion of entitlements will evaporate faster that Obama’s 95% tax cuts. Socialist governments operate quite differently than their rhetoric would have you believe. They’re rather repressive when it comes to any form of self-expression which contrasts with their dogmatic demands for obedience.
Citizens are not entitled to anything except the obligation to contribute to the State’s approved programs. The State Police will quickly disabuse anyone of such Capitalist notions.Ropelight (620237) — 10/15/2008 @ 7:22 am
the more I know you never went to Vietnam.
How dare you insult the honor and integrity of one of our veterans! This guy’s been to ‘Nam, man – and he’s seen some…stuff! You don’t want to know, man!Dmac (cc81d9) — 10/15/2008 @ 7:27 am
The key inclusion of “Era” shows he wasn’t in-country. Like Psyberian, VietnamEraVet spent part of his enlistment at Clark AFB in the Phillipines. I’ve asked both if they know each other, or if either comments here under different names, VEV didn’t respond, that I know of, and Psyberian denies it.Ropelight (620237) — 10/15/2008 @ 7:35 am
Ah, so he’s a REMF…
It explains pretty much everything.Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 10/15/2008 @ 7:42 am
Couple Hussein O’s own criminal organization (ACORN) and massive donations from foreign terrorists and Hussein O is the most corrupt person in the United States. That make him perfect for the criminal and welfare riding democrats in the U.S. The shock will come when he throws the democrat party under the bus (he has actually already did it by admitting he’s a socialist and worse) and they don’t get the massive handouts they’re expecting. The handouts will go to third world Islamic countries in an attempt to become the new ‘king’ of Islam. Islamist are the only people on the planet who are bigger fools than the democrats so Hussin O can con them easy.Scrapiron (6afa35) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:00 am
Blowing a trillion dollars worth of American taxpayer money in Iraq didn’t make Bush the King of Islam, scrap. It made him a joke.
Is Obama that much smarter than the Republicans?snuffles (677ec2) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:31 am
Obama is barely smarter than you, snuffles.JD (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:34 am
snuffles – Bush is blowing up the splodey dopes radical Islamists. The radical Islamists want Baracky to win. There’s a big difference. Tough for you to see, I know. Let me know if I can help.daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:35 am
Huh… And here I thought it made him the guy who brought democratic elections and government to Iraq.
Then again, such a concept IS a joke to democrats, isn’t it…Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:35 am
splodey dopes is one of my all-time favorite words.JD (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:39 am
Actually, Obama is even dumber; Obama believes that false voter registrations, campaign contributions of this sort, and casting multiple votes are not illegal under Federal law.
And he’s a Harvard-trained lawyer.
Really, that’s what’s funny about this; the Obama trolls, rather than condemning their leader’s support of criminal actions, instead attack Bush.
I guess they are incapable of condemning illegal campaign contributions or voter fraud by The One.North Dallas Thirty (efe6ff) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:40 am
Anything done in service of Teh One is good and noble, as they have good intentions.JD (f7900a) — 10/15/2008 @ 8:42 am
How is Mccain so overwhelmed here? Sarah is raising tonnes of cash. Mccain campgin+ RNC have parity with the Obama. DNC is not raising that much. Can somebody explain it to me please?
Comment by prom
McCain agreed to accept federal financing, as did Obama before he decided not to, so fundraising by McCain- Palin go to RNC and Congressional election funds. Their campaign spending is limited to the federal funds.
The standard lefty line about the cost of Iraq makes we wonder what Obama will do to cut defense spending. Discharge all the troops ? DoD spending is pretty much fixed and a large share, 60% or so, is pensions and other not war-fighting costs. Moving troops to Iraq and replacing damaged equipment is expensive but that is pretty much over. What we see now is a cost basis not that much different from the costs of training in the US.
One more example of how these trolls don’t have the first idea about the subject.Mike K (2cf494) — 10/15/2008 @ 9:19 am
Great post and great site you have!
Would you like a Link Exchange with our new blog COMMON CENTS where we blog about the issues of the day?
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.comSteve (126192) — 10/15/2008 @ 10:07 am
Based on my quick analysis 81% of Senators have more experience in the Senate than Obama.Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 10/15/2008 @ 10:24 am
the more I know you never went to Vietnam.
How dare you insult the honor and integrity of one of our veterans! This guy’s been to ‘Nam, man – and he’s seen some…stuff! You don’t want to know, man!
Comment by Dmac — 10/15/2008 @ 7:27 am
Side note: my mom’s brothers all went to ‘Nam. One of them even got blown up there. (sole survivor of a swiftboat)
A few of the things VEV says sound a bit like him– but he’s solid contrarian; he’s been like that all his life. If you say the sky is blue, he’ll argue with you. My husband and I (both also Navy vets) spent a rather enjoyable hour and a half arguing with him, and he argued on Obama’s behalf; his wife and daughter, though, are solid Dems– although I don’t know if his wife favors/ed Hillary– and he’s just as passionate in arguing *for* McCain with them.
So…short version…even if the guy was in Nam, doesn’t make his arguments any less false. (Some of ’em are just patheticly bad, too.)Foxfier (15ac79) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:00 pm
There’s a reason we found Kerry’s two wounds odd. Usually if you were on a Swiftboat, you either were untouched, or it was a BRUTAL wound.Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:34 pm
Heck, son, even I know what that means, and I was a REMF…mojo (8096f2) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:38 pm
Prom and Mike K — my conclusion about the enormous amounts of money Obama is spending is that he’s spending money he doesn’t have, and doesn’t expect to raise before the election. As another commenter noted, he’s buying this ad time “on account” — meaning he’ll have a normal 30 or 60 day billing cycle to pay for it. It’s so much money to the television stations that they aren’t going to demand payment in advance. He’s like any other advertiser — they run the spots and send him the bill.
McCain, having committed to accepting public financing, and being locked into having only $84 million to spend, cannot do the same thing. He cannot spend more than $84 million, and plan on paying the bills with money he raises after the election.
Obama has no such restriction. I mistakenly assumed that if Obama only raised $250 million during the 70 days between being nominated and the election, then he would spend only $250 million — but he’s not. He’s spending $3.5 million a day on advertising alone — that’s $115 million a month — or $230 million between the conventions and the election. That doesn’t count the $2 million a day it costs him to run his campaign. That’s another $120 million.
The sad irony of this entire debacle is that John McCain, champion of campaign finance reform — poking a stick in the eye of his own party and joining hands with the democrats — is now in a position that as GOP nominee for President, a Democrat is in the process of simply buying the election by ignoring campaign finance reforms, and Russ Feingold is right there beside him, cheering him on.
Karma.WLS (26b1e5) — 10/15/2008 @ 12:45 pm
^ And that was the only accomplishment Obama had… latching onto campaign reform. Evil and calculating monster.Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe) — 10/15/2008 @ 1:12 pm
Comment by WLS — 10/15/2008 @ 12:45 pm
If John McCain loses, and the money-gap is perceived to be a significant factor in that loss, he will have been hoist on his own petard – and justifiably so.Another Drew (99fec2) — 10/15/2008 @ 1:53 pm
The regrettable part would be that everyone on the Right will tell him “I told you so”, while we are attempting to minimize the damage presented by an Obama Administration.
The bright part will be that perhaps the Right will be energized enough to pull-together to wrest back the country from the thugs, again.
We’ll just6 need to concentrate on showing how now vs. then stacks up in 4 years of Obama… I suspect “Are you better off” won’t get the answer he might hope then.Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 10/15/2008 @ 2:14 pm
Next up it will come as surprise when people vote for obama while living in a foreign country.imdw (6b8bb0) — 10/15/2008 @ 5:19 pm