Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Audit? Nevermind!

No audit for the Obama campaign? How convenient.

11 Comments:

Anonymous r said...

Man, Obama is being protected on every level. No wonder he was able to steal the election. The reasons given against are contrived. If ever a crooked campaign needed auditing, it would be his to see just where all that foreign money came from.
Even if they did nothing wrong, as the only campaign to ever decline public funding, Obama’s should be audited if only to serve as a measure of public vs. private funding.

November 12, 2008 at 10:57 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

McCain accepted taxpayer funds and the audit that goes with them.

More fun will be the RNC accounting for Palin family wardrobe.

November 12, 2008 at 11:19 AM 
Anonymous r said...

No one here said anything about McCain’s audit, Mr. Dishonest Grasping Distraction.

And I see you’re still clinging to that Palin’s clothes “important issue”. Like that’s as important as Obama receiving campgin funding from foreign terrorist groups… Lol…

You really will say anything, huh?

November 12, 2008 at 11:50 AM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

Amazing how Obama gets insulated. It would be fascinating to see the ins and outs of their expenditures. The nit-picking Palin $150K wardrobe has nothing on what Obama's hiding - let Sarah keep the wardrobe!!!

November 12, 2008 at 12:09 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"No one here said anything about McCain’s audit"

Actually, my fact-challenged friend, the article mentioned it.

I'm not very concerned about the FEC issues regarding the Palin "collection" (unless the credit card purchases by the donors were made to circumvent McCain's spending limits). The great part about it is the RNC's own internal audit and the pissed off donors. The self-inflicted damage is worth far more than any FEC fine or punishment.

The FEC rule "protecting" Obama has to do with long established procedures for small donations and the sizes of errors relative to size of campaign budget. A $100,000 error in categorizing an expense in a $200,000 congressional race is a lot more likely to be fraudulent than a $100,000 category error in a $500 MILLION campaign where that amount could be the bottled water budget at a few giant rallies.

The Obama campaign will not only be conducting plenty of audits of their own books, but Obama will be at the forefront of election and campaign finance reform.

And.. Oh, yeah, it was a LANDSLIDE.

November 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM 
Anonymous r said...

At this point everyone has been so racially bullied and political corrected that there is no way they would do anything that would risk the “first black” presidency. And the blacks have already threatened to riot if Obama were to lose somehow. They must think that African politics of violence and intimidation is how we do democracy here too. And apologist Libs have already showed us that they do not care about Obama’s untruthfulness or lack of qualifications, so they’d never stand for something like his country of birth or illegal campaign contributions to derail their Affirmative Action president.

November 12, 2008 at 1:38 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love how you keep saying Obama stole the election I think he won the election so stop crying. He raised his money by reaching out to the people and people giving five dollars at a time.

November 12, 2008 at 6:54 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"At this point everyone has been so racially bullied..."

Do you mean like the way you demean and racially bully black people?

"if Obama were to lose somehow" then it would have meant a stolen election.

Don't forget, you have been an apologist Rep who hasn't cared about Bush's untruthfulness or Palin's lack of qualifications.

r, it seems like Spencerblog keeps you around as an "affirmative action" blogger so that discredited ideas from the unqualified get their day in the sun.

November 13, 2008 at 8:45 AM 
Anonymous r said...

We have no idea who contributed to his campaign. Duh, that’s the point. We do know things like his illegal alien aunt contributed. The dummy could have pulled it off had she kept below the level to report. How many others did?

November 13, 2008 at 12:01 PM 
Anonymous bob said...

We have no idea who the private donors were that contributed over $150,000 to Palin's wardrobe either.

"The dummy could have pulled it off had she kept below the level to report." Sounds like you are talking about Palin.

November 16, 2008 at 11:56 AM 
Anonymous r said...

And you sound like a third grader, BB. Always.

November 17, 2008 at 11:24 AM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home