« Don't get Cocky. Don't Underestimate Palin | Thinkingman's Blog | Who would gain from debate postponement? »
Obama's Hollywood Fundraiser: Bad Timing? McCain's next ad?
When Obama turned down public financing, he rather self-righteously said the following:
Count on this to be in a McCain ad coming soon to a television near you.
From the very beginning of this campaign, I have asked my supporters to avoid that kind of unregulated activity and join us in building a new kind of politics - and you have. Instead of forcing us to rely on millions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs, you've fueled this campaign with donations of $5, $10, $20, whatever you can afford. And because you did, we've built a grassroots movement of over 1.5 million Americans. We've won the Democratic nomination by relying on ordinary people coming together to achieve extraordinary things.But how exactly does that sentiment square with raising 9 million dollars from the Hollywood crowd at 28,000/plate? How is that ordinary people doing extraordinary things? I guess some rich people and their money are less corrupting of the political process than other rich people and their money are. (Democratic leaning rich people good. Republican leaning rich people bad.)
Count on this to be in a McCain ad coming soon to a television near you.
Advertisement
You do realize Obama has had numerous high ticket fundraisers.
You also do realize McCain just had a rather high profile Hollywood fund raiser himself.
So f'ing what!
September 17, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
What are the movie stars gonna lobby for, botox deregulation?
Obama takes as much money from each individual as they are willing and able (by law) to give. The vast majority of his donors give small amounts (because the vast majority of Americans don't have as much money as Barbara Streisand). Is suspect you are being obtuse on purpose, but just in case you're not, the point is that Obama hasn't taken any money from corporations or lobbyists. Individuals don't request tax breaks or deregulation or other favors. Corporations and lobbyists do.
September 17, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't count on it.
The day before Obama went to Hollywood, McCain appeared at a $50,000/plate fundriser in Miami Beach where he raised $5 million.
And the evening of the day that McCain appeared on Leno's show (Aug 25th), McCain chowed down with his own set of uber-rich Hollywood big shots in Beverley Hills.
So McCain might take pot-shots in his folksy townhall meetings at Obama for taking money from Hollywood celebs, but he's unlikely to say that in a TV/radio ad since that would draw the attention of the factcheckers; they would shoot down that gibe before he could even finish saying "I'm John McCain and I support this statement".
September 17, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pass it around:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080929/berman_ames
September 17, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
So is big money good or bad? Is Obama a patron saint of a new politics free of the influence of big money? Or is he just another guy he will go begging for dollars wherever they are? And was all that talk about ordinary people doing extraordinary things just convenient talk?
September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't you think McCain and his dark legions would try and attack Obama for doing literally anything, anywhere, at any time? Have they left anything out yet?
Nothing to see here, move along now. Show's over...
September 17, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack Obama’s recent Hollywood fundraisers have received attention from many media sources including Reuters and The New York Post. Opponent John McCain has frequently called Obama a celebrity, implying that he is more of a pop culture figure than an experienced politician. Obama’s Hollywood fundraisers and the stories that follow them contribute to this celebrity frame that has been established. If Obama had not been framed as a celebrity before, it is hard to say if the fundraisers would receive as much attention as they have because journalists seek stories that fit into established frames.
The New York Post story about the fundraisers was titled “Barack: Hooray for H’wood $$”(http://www.nypost.com/seven/09172008/news/politics/barack__hooray_for_hwood__129444.htm) and pointed out that major celebrities paid hundreds, even thousands, of dollars to attend the events. It also pointed out that the event took place amid a major Wall Street financial crisis and drew rebukes from Republicans and some Democrats. This implies that Obama should be focusing on the pressing economic issues, not schmoozing with Hollywood celebrities. The relation of the fundraisers to the economic crisis could also reflect negatively on Obama because many people are losing a lot of money while he is making a lot from celebrities.
The Reuters article, “Obama rakes in $9 million at Hollywood fundraisers"(http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/09/17/obama-rakes-in-9-million-at-hollywood-fundraisers/#comments), appeared in the Tales from the Trail blog. It pointed out that Obama “kept the tone of his remarks somber as he talked of the financial crisis that has cast a pall over the economy.” This seems fairer to Obama than the Post story because it shows that he was considering the downfall in the economy. The article also stated that McCain “mocked Obama for mingling with his “celebrity friends” while middle-class Americans were spending their time worrying about the economy.” This shows that McCain is continuing to push the celebrity frame of Obama and the media is picking up on it and reinforcing it by reporting on it.
September 22, 2008 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink