Skip Nav
Relationships
The Ultimate Fall Couples Bucket List
Dating
Stop Fooling Yourself, Girl! 3 Signs He's Clearly NOT Into You
Relationships
Do NOT Date Before the Divorce Is Finalized Until You Consider These Important Factors

Briefing Book! McCain Gets FEC Audit, Obama Gets a Pass


Source

Around The Web
Join The Conversation
CHOOCHOO CHOOCHOO 7 years
Also, I think people complaining about Palin fail to realize that these items were bought FOR her, not BY her. It's been pointed out before, but maybe people are just skimming the facts.
CHOOCHOO CHOOCHOO 7 years
my, the point of the name and address stuff when contributing has more to do with whether or not your name and address match what your credit card says. Elmer Fudd could contribute from your address and the website wouldn't blink an eye. Elmer could contribute $200 from 700 different locations, and that's obviously contributing over the single person limit, but still, the website would accept it.
StolzeMama StolzeMama 7 years
There are still rules for campaign contributions, and the Obama campaign has been called into question on whether the contributions were valid. I think that it is a valid complaint in wanting his fund raising looked into. Why doesn't he offer up that information. McCain does need to be audited as it is a rule of the public financing system, but there is enough question out there that there was shady stuff going on in Obama's fund raising that he SHOULD be audited as well. Of course his backers don't want him audited for fear he might be tarnished... But if donations were made by foreigners, people trying to skirt donations limits, lobbyists etc we as american citizens have the right to know! And lil--- wow, I'm impressed by your words, you stand your ground.
mydiadem mydiadem 7 years
I don't see the connection between Obama's campaign financing and no-bid government contracts. Government contracts obviously use tax payer and public funds, and Obama did not. 'That's odd. I donated to the Obama campaign and was asked for my address and employer. And I definitely donated less than $200!' Ditto, I was asking all kind of information about my employer, residence, etc. when I contributed to the Obama campaign online.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
Oh em1282 you are workin me with that avatar, lol.
em1282 em1282 7 years
Good points, rowlkitty.
rowlkitty rowlkitty 7 years
I think Obama took a big risk in not accepting federal money. The fact that people gave him so much money, to me at least, is a reminder that that money could of easily gone to someone else. It was a big risk and it paid off.
rowlkitty rowlkitty 7 years
Because McCain took taxpayer money I fully back the audit. Since Obama used private funds, I think that the government shouldn't waste money auditing him unless the people who contributed money to his campaign ask for it.
UnDave35 UnDave35 7 years
Hypno - The only problem I have with the whole not using public financing is that "public financing" was set up to even the playing field. This election showed very clearly what kind of advantage a candidate will have if he doesn't have to follow the rules of public funding. The next election will be very intersting. I must say I will be extremely disappointed if Obama reforms campaign financing now that he has abused it to get himself elected.
kelsen kelsen 7 years
lilkimbo, I admire your efforts in this discussion. Well said.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 7 years
I do think that the McCain campaign got as my momma used to say (the $#!++y end of the stick) when it comes to campaign finance. This bull$#!+ about well we'd have to take a vote and all the other votes turned out this way so we just don't want to bother is ridiculous. Take the damn vote at least that way they can say well we tried. If they weren't going to audit the Obama campaign as well they should have just not brought it up at all. As for President Elect Obama going back on his word regarding campaign finance here's the problem most people agree that he did myself included however most of those people don't give a damn that he did and don't see it as negative enough point to rake him over the coals for it. I think his campaign should be audited (if) the McCain campaign is being audited so we can put this to rest. He may have had nuanced reasons for doing what he did who knows but I would like to hear it. Sen. Lieberman should not be punished for his support of a man many conservatives see as a moderate liberal. However, he needs to make his stance clear right here right now and figure out where the hell he stands. This damn jumping everywhere taking off labels slapping on labels is gettin on my nerves. I think the thing with the military support has a lot to do with people not placing blame where blame should be placed. If the military is involved in something we disagree with it is not the military's fault. Blame should be reserved for the Commander & Chief. If I see someone order their dog to attack another person I'm not going to be mad at the dog I'm going to be mad at the owner. The military is nothing more than pawns waiting for the kings orders to come down and it is those orders which we need to trace to the top not to the armed forces.
kastarte2 kastarte2 7 years
That's odd. I donated to the Obama campaign and was asked for my address and employer. And I definitely donated less than $200!
beavis667 beavis667 7 years
Also, the Obama campaign didn't require address verification on credit charge purchases. So, if you gave 200 dollars or less, you didn't have to verify employer, and you didn't have to use a credit card verified address. Perhaps McCain could have raised as much money as Obama if he just skirted the rules too.
kastarte2 kastarte2 7 years
Okay here is the thing about Palin's wardrobe. They bought her the clothes to use on the campaign and as soon as the campaign was over they, went to charity, right? There for it is as lil has said. They were bought for use during the campaign and are there fore a valid campaign expense. If she were keeping them it would be another story. Whenever I heard news casters taking about it, they talked about the cost. Not that clothes had been bought for her but how much was spent. If it were truly illegal, there wouldn't be a debate. We would all know because all the CNNs, Foxs and MSNBCs would have made sure we knew by screaming off the rooftops. Yet I never heard anybody say "it is illegal," they only said, "she spent too much." Plus, how do we know what she wore in Alaska as far as professional attire goes? She might have been wearing nice suits from Macy's but she may have been wearing Sears collection. The McCain camp wanted to present her a certain way. They needed the costume for the character they wanted to create. I don't think that we are going to hear anything about this down the road, as far as the FEC is concerned. If the clothes don't actually make it to charities, that's a different story.
beavis667 beavis667 7 years
As of the first week of October, Obama raised 3.3 million in internet donations where the state of residence didn't match a US state. Those folks may have been American citizens traveling abroad. Or, it could have been illegal campaign contributions. No-bid govt contracts are legal too, it doesn't mean it's right. Are we willing to look the other way and be okay with the shroud of mystery covering Mr. Transparency's campaign contributions?
mydiadem mydiadem 7 years
The law here is harsher on McCain because he took public funds. It was his choice, and those are the laws, and under those laws Obama will probably not face an audit. Fair? Debatable. Legal? Yep. So I see no elephant in here.
beavis667 beavis667 7 years
I'm glad we can focus so much on Palin's wardrobe when there is a 9000lb elephant in the room here. That is, where did Obama get 700 million, and was it all legal? Will we ever know?
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
OK, one last comment before I head out. I never denied that I was being sassy or rude. I give what I get. And, if you read the article, you will see that all campaigns that accept public financing are audited, so the need for the audit is not in any way indicative that something needs to be looked into further. And I don't think anyone is saying that your position is not justified. I didn't realize you were so sensitive as to think that any disagreement meant that the person was saying your opinion is not justified. I will be sure to use my kid gloves in the future! ;)
Jillness Jillness 7 years
You explained it so much better than I did mydiadem!
mydiadem mydiadem 7 years
'campaigning for national office means much nicere attire than being governor of Alaska.' Why? I seriously just don't get it. I don't buy that she needed to wear YSL and Christian Louboutins in order to get elected. McCain and his people can choose to spend whatever money and I really don't care, I just think this sets a bad precedent for women - I can't be a powerful woman, a woman in one of the most powerful positions, without wearing ultra designer clothing and shoes. I think it also is contrary to the whole image she presents, that she is small town and no frills.
Jillness Jillness 7 years
Please, lil, you get sassy just as much as I do. I am not "attacking" you anymore than you are "attacking" me. And yes, I already admitted that they would need to buy her some special clothes, but that hardly justifies $150,000! (In case you don't remember, I said, "I could see them spending a decent amount of money on high quality clothing, but $150,000??") The people who donated did so with the knowledge that their money would be spent according to FEC rules. Obviously there is something here that needs to be looked into further, or the FEC wouldn't be auditing their campaign. Maybe they will find nothing was wrong, but it IS a possibility. I think my position is quite justified.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Anyway, I am not trying to run from this conversation, but I just got called to do something much more important and there is no point of continuing to run in circles snce we are obviously never going to agree. I guess we can leave this whole matter up to the bipartisan FEC to decide. I'm guessing if nothing comes of the audit, we won't hear about it and if something does, we will. But, if you hear anything about the results of the audit, let me know.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Yes, being governor means professional attire. I never denied that. As I have stated several times, campaigning for national office means much nicere attire than being governor of Alaska. If you are honest, you will admit that. If you are honest, you will also admit that you were attacking me and that you attacked me in your last comment. I won't hold my breath. And you're right, this money came from contributions. I think that means that the rules should be less strict than the rules for "writing things off." When you write something off on your taxes, you are paying less to public funds, which people obviously have to give to. The contributions the RNC drew from were all optional.
UnDave35 UnDave35 7 years
TS - Yes he could raise money for the RNC, but that money didn't, and couldn't go to just him. Obama was free to raise as much as he wanted, from anyone he wanted, and McCain didn't have the same freedom. I predict that in 2012 no one will sign the public financing contract. The nice thing is that is a place we could save on tax money.
Jillness Jillness 7 years
I just said it was limiting, hardly a "personal attack". Wow, you're sensitive! I will be sure to use kid gloves in the future. ;) I didn't say that being a Governor is a "national office", but you do represent your state to the nation and participate in national events like those that I mentioned. You act as if the woman would have no need for suits just because she is from Alaska. She did conduct business in other areas of the nation, as I pointed out. Being Governor means attending large numbers of events that require professional attire. Come on...if you are honest you will admit that. I doubt she was wearing jeans when attending the events I mentioned previously. I don't agree with the comparison that spending $150,000 for 2 months worth of clothing is like steel toed boots. Your feet will get crushed if you don't wear boots in a construction site. Your feet will not get crushed if you don't have your Christian Louboutins on! I really find it a bit disturbing that people seem to think it is a requirement for female politicians to also be wearing the absolute highest priced designer clothing that is available. I could see them spending a decent amount of money on high quality clothing, but $150,000?? That is soooooo much money! And it isn't a matter of "writing it off". It is a matter of the contributions of citizens paying for 100% of those items. It is not a tax deduction.
Sasha and Malia Obama Through the Years | Video
Michelle Obama's Best Moments | Video
Where Obama Family Will Live After Presidency
President Obama Speech at Memorial For Dallas Officers 2016
Obama on Killings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile
President Obama's Candid Photos | Video
Barack Obama Sings "Happy Birthday" to Malia July 2016

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

From Our Partners
Latest Love
X