What's wrong with this?

I mean he only promised to only accept public finance....

We don't know hardly anything about this man.

Is McCain doing this, too? If not he should - there is a channel on my satellite television channels menu called OBAMA and runs 24/7 Obama worshipping stuff like the TBN catholic channel...we need to see a McCain channel that is like how the history channel shows all those military dog fights and stuff!

What is the REPORTED difference is in campaign money WASTED now? And people still want to love up a "man" who talks about helping the poor when he blows millions of dollars on advertisements...just now we know even LESS about him and his fundsters. Great. I'm lovin' it.

BUT I must say that is a very clever idea!

I understand the the Obama donation website lacks common security measures that are present on virtually ALL on line retail sites. His site does not verify names and addresses of the donor to the actual card holder data. McCain's site does verify this information.

Why would the campaign not want to use this simple software??? $$$$

I like this comment on the article at WashPost:

Hey, thanks for the info, WaPo. I had no idea I could donate more money using a pre-paid credit card. Thanks for the tip. I'm off to get myself a pre-paid credit card so that I can donate $2300 more to the Obama campaign!
10/29/2008 8:44:25 AM

[edit on 29-10-2008 by undermind]

How come Obama's disciples aren't flying to his rescue on this one?

Seems to me like they have no problems with him breaking his word to them. Guess they should start getting used to it in case he gets elected and fails to keep his promises.

Originally posted by COOL HAND
How come Obama's disciples aren't flying to his rescue on this one?

Seems to me like they have no problems with him breaking his word to them. Guess they should start getting used to it in case he gets elected and fails to keep his promises.

He's received what? Eight times more than McCain?

I doubt if they could even make a dent in returning unsourced donations before the election.

Maybe they should try after? I'm sure plenty would GLADLY take their money back then.

Originally posted by undermind
I'm sure plenty would GLADLY take their money back then.

Not only that, but if Obama wins, they're going to need their money back!

Originally posted by nyk537

Originally posted by undermind
I'm sure plenty would GLADLY take their money back then.

Not only that, but if Obama wins, they're going to need their money back!

But see, McCain can't control his dogs. He's not generating ideas, he's generating resentment at getting a thrashing, which is sad to see, IMO.

Wow! Of all of the MSM newsrags that I thought would be the last to start bucking the political "party lines," it would be the Washington Post...And yet, there it is with a kind of headline I didn't think would show up in a newspaper that's set smack-dab in the nation's biggest hotbed of political corruption & "legally" enforced criminal activity (Yeah, that is my overall viewpoint of Washington D.C.
Incredible, huh?
That is, the whole idea that political candidates very nearly always take campaign contributions from anywhere, legal or not, ethical or not, is not what I think is so hard to believe...IMO, what's hard to believe is that this is the Washington Post actually coming out & saying this point-blank! I used to consider that the Post would be the most pervasively indoctrinated in favor of political bias newspapers in the world...

But this is not the only example of some MSM outlets actually turning around & actually trying to honestly build up some real credibility over the past couple of years or so. It seems that the past 8 years of Bully Boy Bush & His Corporate Crony Gang's "influence" on public opinion (& the overall public in general) has finally started to dent that "MSM Iron Curtain" around Capitol Hill...Whadda ya'all think?