EXCLUSIVE: Debunking the myth of Obama's "BP cash"
May 24, 2010 2:47 pm ET by Julie Millican & Eric Schroeck
On Sunday's Fox News Sunday, Fox News contributor Sarah Palin ludicrously attempted to tie BP to the Obama administration by suggesting that President Obama was beholden to the corporation because of campaign donations he has received. She wondered why no one was asking "if there's any connection with the contributions made to President Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration -- if there's any connection there to President Obama taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico."
Like clockwork, media outlets seized on Palin's accusation and cited Center for Responsive Politics' calculation that Obama had received $71,051 in BP-linked contributions for his presidential campaign. Only problem is, contrary to Palin's and the media's suggestions, all of that money came from BP employees, not BP the company. A spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics confirmed Monday that "the $71,051 that Obama received during the 2008 election cycle was entirely from BP employees." The CRP spokesman also stated that "Obama did not accept contributions from political action committees, so none of this money is from BP's PAC. And corporations themselves are prohibited from donating directly to candidates from their corporate treasuries."
Why is this an important distinction? Because Obama raised far more money than any other candidate ever has, therefore, it is completely unsurprising that Obama also received the most amount of money from BP employees. Moreover, BP-linked contributions to Obama's campaign are a drop in the bucket when compared to Obama's total campaign haul. In addition to the $71,051 Obama received from BP-linked contributors in 2008, Obama's 2004 Senate campaign raised $6,000 from BP-linked sources, bringing Obama's total BP-related campaign contributions to 77,051. This represents less than .01 percent of the nearly $800 million that Obama raised for his campaigns.
Thanks for all the work you do, MMFA.
Without getting into whether the administration’s response has been adequate, we can say that the oil and gas industry leans heavily Republican in its campaign contributions, and the 2008 presidential race was no exception. Republican candidate John McCain and his ticketmate Palin took in nearly three times the amount of money from the industry’s political action committees and employees as did Obama and running mate Joe Biden: about $2.4 million compared with $890,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Obama, however, received about twice as much from British Petroleum’s executives and PAC as McCain did: $71,051 compared with $36,649. {Even FactCheck got this wrong - Obama got NO money from the BP PAC, according to campaign contribution checkers!}
Since 1990, oil and gas industry interests have contributed $188.3 million (75 percent) to Republican candidates for federal office and $61.4 million to Democrats (24 percent), the center says.
I meant to look this up yesterday, but forgot to.
BP's North American HQ's are in Chicago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yup, that's right. So, there's a VERY GOOD reason why Obama got more money from those folks, as he's a local guy to them!
Wasn't it Cocaine Ken that had all the toot-heads in his department?
Media Matters just made me look like a fool again.
I don't know simple Sarah. But I'm wondering why no one is asking" "if there's any connection with the profits made by former VP Cheney and his (oops, I mean Bush's) administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration -- if there's any connection there to VP Cheney taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there and grasp the complexity of drilling in deep water and requiring the latest in blowout prevention control to have avoided the tragedy that we are seeing in the Gulf of Mexico."
I'm no longer surprised what this woman can get away with. Pardon my sweeping generalization, but is there anything that she ever has said that has been truthful or based in reality? I mean every claim she comes up with gets refuted with ease and only her die-hard fanbase is dumb enough to swallow it whole.
This is a half term governor from a small state and failed vp candidate.
She is an idiot.
So, again, I ask and wonder, why is the media listening to this Valley Girl?
They've been discussing, literally ALL FREAKING DAY, if an "ethics crime" has been committed by the "Obama Administration" (not the person who would have offered the "bribe") by offering Sestak a job before the primary....
Seriously...who gives a crap...I wouldn't even care if Republicans did that. They are truly scraping the barrel for anything they can use to maintain their narrative, especially after Dems won the Murtha seat in the election Republicans claimed would be a referendum on Nov.
They are all GOP shills. It would be amazing to see a flicker of even a CAPACITY for individual thought on Fox...they're in constant talking point mode.
Did you see how quickly Fox faces started jumping on the Rand Paul bandwagon after he made a fool of himself this past weekend? Stossel even took what Rand said to a whole 'nutha level...
Even portions of CNN are becoming extremely biased to the right...it's kind of depressing actually...
They don't fact check because it would put a halt to their narrative. Fox has gotten to the point where they are injecting politics into EACH and EVERY program they run...basically a 24/7 shilling, ego-caressing, opinion-fueled & speculation based media OUTLET.
They create politics where a mere mortal human would see none.....
Krugman's NYT piece from a day or two ago tells us the reasons why. (He explains the hatred of Obama by all corporations, from Wall Street to the media to oil companies and the often baffling way they get their tea partying dupes to do their dirty work for them -- and against their own best interests.)