(2007-07-02) — Senators Barack Obama, D-IL, and Hillary Clinton, D-NY, today turned presidential campaigning on its head when they announced that the combined $52 million in primary campaign cash they raised in the second quarter would be redistributed to less fortunate candidates like Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich.
In a joint news release, Senators Obama and Clinton said, “The fundamental principles of the Democrat party say that the rich and powerful have an obligation to help the poor and downtrodden.”
Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, not slated to benefit from the redistribution, denounced the move as a “crass political ploy which lacks the weight of traditional Democrat moral leadership, because it was voluntary.”
“If Hillary and Barry really believed in our Democrat principles,” Mr. Edwards said, “they wouldn’t voluntarily give their money to a few poor candidates…money which was voluntarily given to them. Instead, they would introduce legislation to mandate that all presidential candidates be given an equal amount of taxpayer dollars. This could be done without raising taxes on anyone but the filthy rich, and by shifting money from the Pentagon’s quagmire budget to this new program.”
53 responses so far ↓
1 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 2, 2007 at 6:09 am
God Bless America
2 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 2, 2007 at 6:18 am
I predict that the grinmaster, B. Hussein Obama, will continue to run for-and lose-the presidency for the next couple of decades, amassing a huge fortune while watching the hundreds of millions in donations to his career as a professional campaigner disappear into the twilight.
3 Hawkeye // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:11 am
Spot on, Scott! Liberals don’t like to give away their own money… just everybody else’s.
4 Ms RightWing, Ink // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:35 am
You mean the filthy rich Ted Kennedy will have to be taxed for the peons to run. Oh dear me, pass the Scotch.
5 Hillary Clinton ‘08 » Obama, Clinton Redistribute Campaign Cash to Poor Rivals // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:47 am
[…] Read more: Scott Ott […]
6 onlineanalyst // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:54 am
That goodness Maestro Ott has come out of hibernation. I was beginning to fear that Laughter-in-the-Dark (of the Lion’s Den) had bound and gagged our voice of sanity in order to dominate the bandwidth with Laff-a-Minute self-serving tripe.
In related news: Madame Hillary, never one to avoid the opportunity to engage in the politics of personal destruction herself, mischaracterized Fred Thompson’s remarks about Cuban-Americans in order to drive further wedges into the American electorate.
“LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. - Taking a swipe at a potential GOP presidential rival, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday criticized Fred Thompson for suggesting illegal Cuban immigrants pose a terrorist threat.
“I was appalled when one of the people running for or about to run for the Republican nomination talked about Cuban refugees as potential terrorists,” Clinton told Hispanic elected officials. “Apparently he doesn’t have a lot of experience in Florida or anywhere else, and doesn’t know a lot of Cuban-Americans.”
BUT here is what Fred Thompson said:
Anybody who knows my track record or has read some of the things I’ve written about the Cuban-American community knows where I stand. While the communist dictatorship has been a tragedy for Cuba, America has been in some ways, at least, the beneficiary.
One of those benefits is the presence of the great Cuban-American artist, Gloria Estefan. She co-wrote a song called “No hay mal que por bien no venga” which I understand translates something like — there’s no bad that doesn’t bring some good. The bad that is Castro’s tyranny has given America one of the greatest communities in the Western Hemisphere.
And no one knows better than that community that the Castro regime remains dedicated to infiltrating American institutions to spread his ideology of tyranny. Castro admitted it himself in an interview with CNN in 1998.
This is why the Cuban government rightfully remains on the State Department’s terrorist list for its continued support of terrorism. It’s also why we must oppose the illegal immigration of Castro’s agents into the United States while welcoming the vast majority who immigrate legally and with legal intentions.”
More of Fred’s remarks on the topic are here: http://fredfile.imwithfred.com/2007/a-good-day/#more-40
Madame Hillary Red-Ham must truly fear the threat that Fred Thompson poses to her ascendancy as Chair(wo)man-Grandmaster of the Universe.
7 onlineanalyst // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:57 am
The opening remark was supposed to be “Thank goodness…”, not “That goodness”.
I nearly had the post completed when I lost it. Relying on memory, I failed to proofread, but you get the picture.
At any rate, welcome back, Scott. We missed you.
8 RedPepper // Jul 2, 2007 at 8:31 am
And the rich relations may give you
A crust of bread and such
You can help yourself
But don’t take too much
‘Cause Mama may have
And Papa may have
But God bless the child that’s got his own
That’s got his own …
Oh, sing it, Dennis ! Sing it !
9 Fred Sinclair // Jul 2, 2007 at 8:59 am
John Edwards joins the august ranks up in the stratosphere with his cohorts Paris Hilton, Ted Kennedy, the Clintons, etc., etc., etc. who collectively have gone to extreme lengths and have proven, beyond reasonable doubt - that you DON’T have to be poor, to be white trash.
btw - Scott - it’s been a loooong time but as usual this is well worth the wait.
Heirborn Ranger
10 Darthmeister // Jul 2, 2007 at 9:14 am
Obama, Clinton Redistribute Campaign Cash to Poor Rivals
For true progressives it would be the “compassionate” thing to do, right?
11 Obama, Clinton Redistribute Campaign Cash to Poor Rivals - Right Mind // Jul 2, 2007 at 9:25 am
[…] From Scott Ott over at Scrapple Face: […]
12 Anonymous // Jul 2, 2007 at 9:43 am
i’m going a little OT, but i think this relates to the “poor”
fox has a story about the iphone where there is a picture of five (illegal) immigrants with seven bags (supposedly containing iphones).
respectfully, i’d like to suggest Mr. Ott do a follow-up story and i’d suggest that somewhere in the article a quote like, “we’re taking the phones that Americans don’t want” would be very appropriate - especially with the picture as reference.
i’m mostly a lurker, but i love all you guys (even you poor dhims that make coffee jet from my nose).
link to the fox story
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,287638,00.html
God bless America.
13 conserve-a-tips // Jul 2, 2007 at 10:22 am
Well, Scott, you have been missed, but this made up for your absense!! Great piece.
If this is true, I’m thinking about registering as a Democrat and then forming a presidential exploratory committee. I think that I will run a “Canning Campaign” - “a jar of green beans in every pantry.” I am going to approach Ms Rightwing, Ink about heading up the section on bringing in the bread. I am referring to whole wheat since Ms Clinton and Obama would be supplying me with the green kind.
On the road again—
14 Fred Sinclair // Jul 2, 2007 at 10:48 am
4th of July this week - take the test I got 26 out of 30. I took it last year and I think I missed the same four then.
http://www.wservernews.com/DYCX96/070416-Citizenship-Test
Heirborn Ranger
15 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 12:05 pm
“Former South Carolina Sen. John Edwards, not slated to benefit from the redistribution, denounced the move as a “crass political ploy which lacks the weight of traditional Democrat moral leadership, because it was voluntary.””
A minor detail, but actually it’s former North Carolina Senator John Edwards! But, I guess that’s close enough here.
[Editor’s Note: ScrappleFace regrets the offense to the people of South Carolina. Thanks for the proofreading.]
Henry, was it you, Mack, or conserve-a-tips, who did the fact checking?
Never mind, go ahead with your smearing!
16 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 12:21 pm
Thanks Anonymous,
But, wouldn’t you like to add a little something about Henry’s thickness?
OK, it’s still nice!
17 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Anonymous,
Don’t be scared of the “Darthmeister”, it’s really only little Henry.
18 EXT // Jul 2, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Edwards has retaliated against Hillary’s refusal to share the cash with him.
He announced, just moments ago, that he has declined her request that he share with her the name of his hairdresser.
19 velvel of decatur // Jul 2, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Scott, very funny, even to a Blue Dog like me. However, if you want to be believed, it is “Democratic,” and NOT “Democrat.” Even the Newt and Boortz know the read name of our party (and drop the “ic” because they know it is annoying. Mayhaps the elephantine party should be known as the “Publican” party?
And these whiney babies are so quick to shift money from some to others while keeping their hands in their own pockets.
Maybe if Al Gore throws his globally warmed hat into the ring he will give more of his used underwear?
20 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 1:08 pm
velvel of decatur,
Nice post, I was a Blue Dog! But these people here have about moved me to be a “Green Dog”.
I knew about Clinton’s underwear, but I hadn’t heard about Gore’s underwear; do you suppose this may be just another example of MSM’s “Right-Wing Bias?
21 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 1:22 pm
velvel of decatur,
Everthink, if you rip off large amounts, you don’t have to do those underwear donation deductions!
22 Shelly // Jul 2, 2007 at 1:32 pm
velvel, Newt is being politically correct and Boortz is making fun of Democrats for trying to convince everyone that they haven’t recently tried to rename themselves. Scott is traditional, and hence uses the traditional name the party has had before this new attempt to make an adjective into a noun.
23 Darthmeister // Jul 2, 2007 at 1:32 pm
I bet sHrillary and Obama would redistribute their campaign wealth in pesos to the other candidates, with the possible exception of John Edwards (D-Moon) who would receive his share in Confederate money.
24 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 2:12 pm
velvel of decatur,
What Shelly said, AND many “Conservatives” are snotty folks who want to get our Democrat goats.
Of course, it is the Democrats who are Democratic!
The Republicans believe in “Representative Democracy”. That’s kind of like your only job is to obey and support the leader (if he’s a Republican) regardless how much a weasel, lame brained thief he is, or how his violates his oath, or the U. S. Constitution, or what he does to our country!
I hope that helps you some, but remember, if you are going to change the diapers here, you have to get used to the smell!
25 Ted // Jul 2, 2007 at 2:19 pm
The campaigns of Biden, Gravel, and Kucinich do mark them as the “poor and downtrodden” so they are no threat to Obama and Hillary. They will probably get another allocation from the “I” catagory: those who are insipid, inane, and inept.
Ted
26 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 2:26 pm
New voices, fresh ideas, a better point of view; ain’t this just grand!
27 Effeminem // Jul 2, 2007 at 3:09 pm
It’s the Dems’ fault for picking a name that’s not a noun and adjective at the same time. I blame Carter.
28 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Effeminem,
OK, you got me stumped, why Carter?
29 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Dorky, that sHrillary you do just cracks me up, although I have to admit though it wasn’t funny the first two, or three hundred times.
Can you do your cool Bush Hitler thing with the $$$$s I think thats my favorite, you must have done it a thousand times, and still I have to shake my head.
You are a Wordsmith, for sure!
30 McCain: Stick a Fork In Him | PAWaterCooler.com // Jul 2, 2007 at 3:56 pm
[…] Senator Silky Pony is upset. […]
31 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 5:00 pm
I just saw where Bush has commuted the prison sentence of Scooter Libby to probation.
Now, we’re going to have some real fireworks!
As usual, Mr. Bush has failed to fully consider the repercussions of his actions. He has just made it easier to do what badly needs to be done!
32 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 2, 2007 at 5:21 pm
The President had no (logical) choice, in my opinion, but to commute Libby’s sentence. It was the right thing to do and will do wonders toward regaining the respect (mine, at least) Bush deserves-not from the Leftists, of course, they respect no one, particularly themselves.
33 Mack // Jul 2, 2007 at 5:35 pm
I would say it’s funny how trolls come back from a thrashing by being even more shrill, but then again it’s not funny. If L@Y was actually witty or funny it would be one thing, but it’s not.
O’Bama adds to the discussion. He is smooth and well mannered even if I can’t agree with much of anything he says he still is a likable fellow. Bill Clinton is much the same and I have no respect for him at all. L@Y is nothing more than a busted liar with shrill annoying habits.
Though Clinton is also a busted liar he at least has manners. Which is more than I can say for his wife. The local news here led with the story that Bill was in town stumping for Hillary. Terrorists blowing up cars in England takes a back seat to Billy coming to town with the local media.
Advice for L@Y, read what you post before you post it. If you ever want to be more than just annoying to the people around here. As your credibility is shot again I would also suggest you change your name again. It won’t matter as you style or lack there of will out you again soon enough.
34 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 5:41 pm
“What trick, what device, what starting-hole canst thou now find out, to hide thee from this open and apparent shame?”
-Taken from: Henry IV, part I
35 JamesonLewis3rd // Jul 2, 2007 at 5:44 pm
I guess it’s a typo, then, that the Democrats aren’t referred to as Democratics at Democrats.Senate.gov.
Also at the “Party Division in the Senate, 1789-Present” page of the Senate’s web site, for just one example.
I think they have a lot of nerve thinking of themselves as “democratic”, anyway. Whatever. Who cares. The Democrat Party full of
36 Pickerhead :: Pickings from the Webvine ::July 2, 2007 // Jul 2, 2007 at 6:37 pm
[…] Scrappleface says Clinton and Obama are distributing campaign cash to their less fortunate rivals. […]
37 EXT // Jul 2, 2007 at 6:55 pm
It used to be The Democratic Party.
They surrendered the right to the “ic” when they developed policies that would have put Harry S Truman on trial as a war criminal for having dared to win a war.
Some around Chicago want to put him on trial anyway. Possibly a valid effort since everyone knows Democrats never die in Chicago. They rise from the grave each election day so the trial would have to be a rather hurried one.
If they wanted honesty they’d just adopt the more appropriate “Cut, Run, Appease Party” name (CRAP for short but not for long).
38 Darthmeister // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Like I said over a month ago, under the Constitution the President has the option to commute sentences and sure enough he did it. Libby should continue in his appeals to clear his name since he believes himself to be innocent.
Somewhere along the way some judge or tribunal may see the left-wing political machinations which ran throughou the three year period culminating in Libby’s conviction on a tenuous perjury charge. Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald admitted no crime was committed (interesting that Richard Armitage - the man who first “leaked” Valerie Plame’s name - was never interviewed, called to testify or convicted of the “crimes” the DemDonks were whining about) other than the fact that several journalists who were demonstrated to have had imperfect memories themselves could only mount a he/she-said-he said campaign against Libby. You don’t sentence people to two years in prison on the basis of imperfect memories or to satisfy the left-wing/media lynch mob. Another kerfuffle that the Donks will blow up ten thousand fold to continue their tiresome narrative that there is a Bu$Hitler/Cheney/Libby/Rove cabal that needs to be brought down. Conspiracy moonbats all.
39 Darthmeister // Jul 2, 2007 at 7:10 pm
… and what did Sandy Burglar get for stealing and destroying national security documents and then originally lying about it to federal agents? A $50K fine.
… and what did Clinton get for bald-face lying to a federal judge and a grand jury while under oath? A $90K fine and no jail time.
Clearly double-standards are at work here.
40 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Oh Yeah, not so fast Dorkster,
Patrick Fitzgerald says his investigation is back on!
John Dean says: Fitzgerald can call him again, and ask the same questions again, and if he perjures himself again, he can charge him again.
Or, he can give him immunity preventing him from pleading the fifth.
Ah get you check books out folks, and send cookies to the Scoot.
Meantime, a case for impeachment continues to build …
41 Laughing@You // Jul 2, 2007 at 8:19 pm
Sandy Berger’s not on trail, is he?
Y’all tried Clinton and failed, didn’t you!
Sorry Darth, you don’t make the cut. Now, take Lumpy and go back to the sandbox.
42 Darthmeister // Jul 3, 2007 at 6:33 am
Ever hear of double-jeopardy, moron?
You’ve proved my point again. Clinton and Burglar “aren’t on trial” because they were never put on criminal trial. Double-standards.
Clinton was never tried in criminal court. He was impeached and his Democratic buddies in the Senate gave him a pass in an impeachment trial, not in a criminal trial before a jury of 12.
What goes around comes around. I hope one day your life is turned upside down when people will swear to different memories than you which subsequently puts you behind bars … but in your case the governor of your state refuses to commute your sentence or pardon you. Having a little taste of your own medicine might do you some good … hmmmm, probably not.
I see you’re a mouse studying to be a rat.
43 gafisher // Jul 3, 2007 at 6:56 am
VofD Re #19: “Mayhaps the elephantine party should be known as the “Publican” party?”
The irony might be lost on, er, Democratics, but anyone familiar with Luke 18:10-14 would probably find the association flattering.
44 Darthmeister // Jul 3, 2007 at 7:09 am
Clinton pardons documented here.
What scum and villainy. Bet they were all Democrats, too.
45 gafisher // Jul 3, 2007 at 7:53 am
L@Y Re: #41 — In effect, WC was tried and found guilty (”impeached”) but the Senate commuted his sentence.
46 Laughing@You // Jul 3, 2007 at 8:40 am
No Gafisher,
The is not the effect! This was a bill of impeachment. Both Houses of Congress must act, as on any bill. The effect of the crazy Right-Wing Wackjobs in the House was blunted by the wiser Upper House.
But, hang in the fella, we may be able to show you an example of how to do it!
47 Laughing@You // Jul 3, 2007 at 8:47 am
Gafisher,
About your post 43
Actually brainy, that would be a great idea to renamed the Republican Party to be the Publican Party!
Apparently the time you spent in Rev. Billy Bob’s First Bible Academy will take some time to unlearn.
The Publicans were like the Republicans EXCEPT for ONE them!
48 Laughing@You // Jul 3, 2007 at 8:55 am
Dorky,
Please reconsider your frequent use of the word “scum”. It is a vulgar word.
There are other vulgar words that might be used for Republicans. Words that a good upbring, and Christian virtue, have prevented me from using, but I can, and will, if you don’t knock it off!
49 Laughing@You // Jul 3, 2007 at 9:06 am
Ever hear of double-jeopardy, moron?
Perhaps, if you were to study my post 40, you might notice the name of John Dean. You may remember John Dean from the Nixon Administration. (He has a book called: “Worse Than Watergate”). Let’s see whose right!
“I see you’re a mouse studying to be a rat.”
I’m putting that right here in my notebook. It will be charged to your account! You won’t like my payback!
50 gafisher // Jul 3, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Re #46 “This was a bill of impeachment.”
Impeachment is a little different from legislation, L@Y. The actual impeachment is solely the work of the House, with the subsequent action required of the Senate being not to confirm or deny (or “blunt”) impeachment but to determine the appropriate consequences. William Clinton was and remains impeached, though fewer than two thirds of the Senate respected the Constitution, the People or the Office sufficiently to fulfill their responsibility.
51 Laughing@You // Jul 3, 2007 at 3:45 pm
gafisher,
Accepting your statement, if Democrats similarly decide Mr. Bush has committed an impeachable offense tomorrow, they would have the votes to impeach him, wouldn’t they?
52 Laughing@You // Jul 3, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Henry says. “the Senate commuted his sentence.” I suspect we both disagree with him, can you explain why “commuted” is an improper, and misleading term?
53 dirtyoldman // Jul 7, 2007 at 12:04 am
Duh???? Isn’t Mr. Edwards one of those filthy rich folks???? And now it’s undemocratic to do something on a volunteer basis????? The haircuts must have made this man lose it all. Say good night John. Who is less consequential right now, John Kerry, Al Gore, or John Edwards. My goodness, they are trotting out some lame ideas.
You must log in to post a comment.