MyFox
 

jax276's Blog

by jax276

Last Post 14 hours Ago




Maureen Dowd, winner of the 1999 Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary, became a columnist on The New York Times Op-Ed page in 1995 after having served as a correspondent in the paper's Washington bureau since 1986. She has covered four presidential campaigns and served as White House correspondent. She also wrote a column, 'On Washington,' for The New York Times Magazine. 
                                                       
             

Ms. Dowd joined The New York Times as a metropolitan reporter in 1983. She began her career in 1974 as an editorial assistant for The Washington Star, where she later became a sports columnist, metropolitan re porter and feature writer. When the Star closed in 1981, she went to Time magazine.

Born in Washington D.C. , Ms. Dowd received a B.A. degree in English literature from Catholic University ( Washington , D.C. ) in 1973.

WHERE DID OBAMA'S MONEY COME FROM??????? Subject: New York Times Editorial
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: June 29, 2008
Go to Columnist Page

Certainly the most interesting and potentially devastating
. OBAMA'S TROUBLING INTERNET FUND RAISING. Certainly the most interesting and potentially devastating phone call I have received during this election cycle came this week from one of the Obamaâ's campaign internet geeks.  These are the staffers who devised Obama's internet fund raising campaign which raised in the neighborhood of $200 million so far.  That is more then twice the total funds raised by any candidate in history and this was all from  the internet campaign.

What I learned from this insider was shocking but I guess we shouldn't be surprised that when it comes to fund raising there simply are no rules that can't be broken and no ethics that prevail.

Obama's internet campaign started out innocently enough with basic e-mail networking , lists saved from previous party campaigns and from supporters who visited any of the Obama campaign web sites.

Small contributions came in from these sources and the internet campaign staff  were more than pleased by the results.

Then, about two months into the campaign the daily contribution intake multiplied.  Where was it coming from? 
One of the web site security monitors began to notice the bulk of the contributions were clearly coming in from overseas internet service providers and at the rate and frequency of transmission it was clear these donations were programmed by a very sophisticated user.

While the security people were not able to track most of the sources due to firewalls and other blocking devices put on these contributions they were able to collate the number of contributions that were coming in seemingly from individuals but the funds were from only a few credit card accounts and bank electronic funds transfers.  The internet service providers (ISP) they were able to trace were from  Saudi Arabia ,  Iran , and other Middle Eastern countries. One of the banks used for fund transfers was also located in  Saudi Arabia  

Another concentrated group of donations was traced to a
Chinese ISP with a similar pattern of limited credit card charges.

It became clear that these donations were very likely coming from sources other than American voters.  This was discussed at length within the campaign and the decision was made that none of these donations violated campaign financing laws. 

It was also decided that it was not the responsibility of the campaign to audit these millions of contributions as to the actual source (specific credit card number or bank transfer account numbers) to insure that none of these internet contributors exceeded the legal maximum donation on a cumulative basis of many small donations.  They also found the record keeping was not complete enough to do it anyway.

This is a shocking revelation.

We have been concerned about the legality of bundling contributions after the recent exposure of illegal bundlers but now it appears we may have an even greater problem.

I guess we should have been somewhat suspicious when the numbers started to come out.  We were told (no proof offered) that the Obama internet contributions were from $10.00 to $25.00 or so.

 If the $200,000,000 is right, and the average contribution was $15.00, that would mean over 13 million individuals made contributions?  That would also be 13 million contributions would need to be processed.  How did all that happen?

I believe the Obama campaign's internet fund raising needs a serious, in depth investigation and audit.  It also appears the whole question of internet fund raising needs investigation by the legislature and perhaps new laws to insure it complies not only with the letter of these laws but the spirit as well.
  
IS IT RIGHT FOR FOREIGN COUNTRIES TO HAVE AN INVESTMENT IN WHO BECOMES OUR NEXT PRESIDENT??? 

10 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 10
Page 1 of 1
jax276 read my blog view my photos
Sep 1, 2008 | 12:29 PM

I probably should have put this in the political section.

shockhazard read my blog view my photos
Sep 1, 2008 | 12:57 PM

Great post Jax ! Politicians never surprise me when it comes to " Creative Fund Raising " .
Especialy , democrats !

LLCDODGE read my blog view my photos
Sep 2, 2008 | 1:06 PM

I don't think so, they cannot vote so why give money?

jax276 read my blog view my photos
Sep 2, 2008 | 7:00 PM

LLC, It was an article from the NY Times, I didn't research this myself. That's why the author and bio is at the top. The answer to your question is easy, INFLUENCE.

Mikey66 read my blog view my photos
Sep 3, 2008 | 7:13 PM

JAX , DID YOU KNOW THAT KEISER IS SPLITTING TOWN FOR A NEW JOB , I DIDNT KNOW IF YOU KNEW , HE HAS A GOODBYE BLOG , DELETE THIS ONCE YOU READ IT

SenorGuz read my blog
Sep 7, 2008 | 3:31 PM

jax276 it is individuals like you that I'm referring to. Please don't fall victim to fear. Saul Alinsky fought to empower the poor in the ghettos and trailer parks around the United States. In this 21st Century I can tell you that if he were alive today he would have included the Middle Class. Listen in a Democracy, namely ours, it's about "We the People". Not "We the Rich".

The Democrats are not for becoming the old USSR. They are merely expressing the fact that the rich need to stop enslaving those who have less. They need to accept the consequences of bad business decisions. You see big corporate America have socialist views too. Indirect but more socialist than anything implemented by the Democratic Party since it’s inception. Glad you asked! Lets see Hmm. Oh, yea I like to call this selective socialism. We (Poor and Middle Class) bail out big Corporations, Mortgage Lenders and Banks when they come up with or implement strategies that earn them immediate profits but ultimately cause them to fold. Well, they don’t really fold because they run to Government and tell them that it is the responsibility of all citizens to make sure they don’t become poor. Here let me drop a little knowledge on you. Anytime Government funds are used in that manner it is indirectly socialist. Lets see, we don’t want our tax dollars to pay for Health Care or Education but we do want it to pay to prevent big private agencies from becoming poor due to bad practices and poor decisions.

SenorGuz read my blog
Sep 7, 2008 | 3:32 PM

Let me think about that. I’ll take socialized Health care and Education over selective Socialization of big Corporations, Mortgage Lenders and Banks. You see one benefits all and the other, well, only benefits the rich.

dinkiedow read my blog
Sep 9, 2008 | 6:47 PM

yes as an xmarine i have marine connections.these are military hater's in disguise,they say thier for vets there not.they ask for the moon,because no buddy going to give that.t5hen they say the republican won't agree.the same tactics they used with SS. they finally tip[ed there hat by giving SS to illegals,even at a higher rate that most that payed in.yes i do let comments through i was just trying to find out what answers you were asking of me. as far is obama's money for0r his campaign,everyone knows it coming from Muslims through cash cards so they can't be traced.the FBI needs to raid their headquarters.there has to be a law against knowingly takings money from terrorist and their alloys.

dinkiedow read my blog
Sep 9, 2008 | 8:46 PM

i also have respect for your comments also.isn't it so easy when you only have to speak the truth.i don't understand,every one knows enough to throw him off the bus,but they have him drive just for the hope of still making it.they know it's too late to turn back now.

dinkiedow read my blog
Sep 20, 2008 | 11:01 PM

looks like two birds of a feather fly together.it's nice to correspond with another vet.i know how you feel about open wounds.i have held it in for 40 yrs,but this time i'm not holding anything back.i'm 100%service connected.but actually 180 but the VA doesn't count very well.i wonder if anyone was 200%,would they have to give two checks.i bet you have been through this to.your still in battle with the VA.they give you nothing.you have to fight them tooth&nail.they are lawyer ed up and you have to fight them on your own.sorry but i just rattle on .like once the gates opened,there was no holding back the water.with all the chatter of vietnam vets against john McCain i just had to tell everyone the truth.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




jax276

I've lived in and around Detroit most of my life. For many years I worked in steel trades that were involved in automobile manufacture. I changed careers at 35 and received a degree in Electronics Engineering which evolved into broadcast engineering. Do to a stoke and spinal problems I am now disabled and am working at becoming the worlds slowest typist. My mind is still clear though and as I've read I've noticed many of yours are as well.

Member Since: 11/16/2007