Media Picking up on Obama's Dubious Donations

By SCOTT W. JOHNSON


Obama: Failing to put up basic blocks against fraudulent giving.

Posted: 3:36 amOctober 27, 2008



Barack Obama has proved the greatest fund-raiser of all time by a long shot. His campaign has raised more than $600 million - $150 million in September alone. But the campaign has also failed to adopt standard protections against fraudulent giving.


The average contribution to Obama in September was just under $86. And federal law only requires the disclosure of identifying information for contributions in excess of $200. Campaigns must keep running totals for each donor and report them once they exceed $200.


The Federal Election Commission says the Obama campaign has reported well over $200 million as coming from contributions of $200 or less. Only a small portion of that sum is attributable to donors the Obama campaign has disclosed.


No presidential campaign has ever before received such a gargantuan sum of money from unidentified contributors.


The campaign's records reveal big contributors with names like "Doodad Pro" (employer: "Loving," profession: "You") and "Good Will" (same employer and profession). Both donated via credit card. Other reports have suggested that some donations come from overseas - raising the question of whether Obama is accepting donations from foreigners, another violation of federal law.
All of which prompted an enterprising citizen to test the controls put in place to enforce compliance with federal campaign law by the Obama and McCain campaigns. Last Thursday, he decided to conduct an experiment.


He went to the Obama campaign Web site and made a donation under the name "John Galt" (the hero of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged"). He provided the equally fictitious address "1957 Ayn Rand Lane, Galts Gulch, CO 99999."
He checked the box next to $15 and entered his actual credit-card number and expiration date. He was then taken to the next page and notified that his donation had been processed.


He then tried the same experiment on the McCain site, which rejected the transaction. He returned to the Obama site and made three more donations using the names Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and Bill Ayers, all with different addresses but the same credit card. The transactions all went through. By Saturday, he'd reported that the transactions had all posted to his credit-card account.

VIEW FULL ARTICLE >PAGE 1 2 CONTINUE READING



And now CBS Coverage by Katie Couric

Now if someone would just look into his "former" Finance Manager now living in Martinique........



View All Recent Meet the Real Sarah Palin Blog Posts:

CBS: Palin the Second Coming of Reagan

National Review Online: Republicans Sigh In Relief As VP Nominee Embodies Spirit Of Comeback Reagan

(National Review Online) This column was written by John J. Pitney Jr.

‘The moral elements,” Clausewitz wrote, “are among the most important in war.” He was talking about such things as morale, confidence, and devotion to a cause. With a moral advantage, an outnumbered force may win a surprise victory. Without it, well-equipped legions may go down to defeat.

That’s the significance of Sarah Palin’s debate performance. After all the lousy news of recent weeks, Republicans were starting to get gloomy. Mostly because of financial turmoil, Barack Obama’s lead in the polls edged upward. John McCain’s “suspension” of his campaign failed to have the desired effect, and his position on the Paulson plan put him at odds with many Republicans.

Palin herself contributed to the gloom by giving awkward interviews on television. On the morning of the debate, NBC’s Chuck Todd came close to declaring the race to be over: “All the trend lines are pointing in Obama’s direction. . . . [Pointing to a series of battleground-state polls] This should really scare the McCain campaign. This thing - it’s at a tipping point.”

There was speculation that a poor Palin performance could decisively tip the election to Obama. Her supporters held their breath. A few minutes after she walked onto the stage, they could exhale. They were watching the poised and feisty Palin of the Republican convention, not the hesitant Palin of the Gibson and Couric shows. The election wasn’t over yet. She bolstered Republican morale in other ways, too.

In politics as in war, you have to rally the troops against an opponent. You also have to pick the right target. Focusing her fire on Joe Biden would not have helped much, since most Republicans don’t have strong feelings about him. Instead, she went after the One. During the debate, she nodded to Biden while throwing verbal daggers at Obama:

“Barack Obama voted against funding troops there after promising that he would not do so. And Sen. Biden, I respected you when you called him out on that. You said that his vote was political and you said it would cost lives.”

“You also said that Barack Obama was not ready to be commander in chief. And I know again that you opposed the move he made to try to cut off funding for the troops and I respect you for that.”

As she did at the Republican convention, she reminded people at the grassroots that she is one of them. “I think we need a little bit of reality from Wasilla Main Street there, brought to Washington, D.C.” Once again, the liberal elites will sneer at her background as a hockey mom and small-town mayor. The more they sneer, the more they’ll fire up the Republican volunteers.

Nothing in politics touches Republicans as deeply as the memory of Ronald Reagan. A few weeks ago, Michael Reagan made a remarkable comment: “Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he’s a she.” By making this comparison, he perhaps said more than he realized. The Gipper did not always shine in debates and press conferences. He made mistakes that worried his aides and political allies. Still, he had a way of coming back and reenergizing the ranks.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/03/opinion/main4498482.shtml

View All Recent Blog Posts: