NPR, CNN's Crowley report on Obama's Beverly Hills fundraiser, ignore McCain's recent lucrative fundraisers
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: NPR and CNN reported that Sen. John McCain mocked Sen. Barack Obama for holding fundraisers in Beverly Hills that were expected to raise several million dollars, but neither report noted that McCain himself reportedly attended a fundraiser in Miami earlier in the week that raised several million dollars and held a fundraiser last month in Beverly Hills attended by celebrities.
During the September 17 edition of NPR's Morning Edition, correspondent Scott Horsley reported on what he described as "a pair of posh fundraisers in Beverly Hills" for Sen. Barack Obama, and in the following segment, correspondent David Greene reported on Sen. John McCain's criticism of Obama for attending one featuring Barbra Streisand. But neither Horsley nor Greene reported that McCain also attended a fundraiser in Miami earlier in the week at which he reportedly raised $5.1 million. Nor did they point out that McCain reportedly held a fundraiser in Beverly Hills with celebrities last month.
During the first segment, Horsley reported: "After speaking in Colorado, Obama was off to California for a pair of posh fundraisers in Beverly Hills -- one of them featuring Barbra Streisand." Following Horsley's segment, Greene reported: "I'm David Greene, traveling with Senator McCain, who had some things to say about Obama's fundraiser out in Beverly Hills." Greene then aired a clip of McCain saying of Obama: "He talked about siding with the people, siding with the people, just before he flew off to Hollywood for a fundraiser with Barbra Streisand and his celebrity friends. Let me tell you, my friends, there's no place I'd rather be than here with the working men and women of Ohio." Greene ended the segment by saying: "These days, McCain's speeches are all about the economy. ... Oh, and there's also no Barbra Streisand music."
Similarly, on the September 16 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, senior political correspondent Candy Crowley reported of Obama's Beverly Hills fundraisers: "One of those fundraisers ... $28,500 a head." She added: "That was too good for John McCain to pass up. He told one crowd he'd rather be talking to working class men and women in Ohio." But while Crowley noted Obama's fundraiser for "$28,500 a head," she did not note McCain's Miami fundraiser or his fundraiser with celebrities in Beverly Hills.
By contrast, in a September 17 Wall Street Journal article, Brody Mullins and Glenn R. Simpson reported: "Many of the fund-raising events that Republican rival Sen. McCain attends, including one in Miami on Monday, begin with a private cocktail hour with the Arizona senator for contributors donating about $25,000 each. Some events that Sen. McCain held this summer for his campaign and the Republican National Committee offered special treatment for couples who wrote checks of up to $100,000."
From Horsley's report on the September 17 edition of NPR's Morning Edition:
HORSLEY: After speaking in Colorado, Obama was off to California for a pair of posh fundraisers in Beverly Hills -- one of them featuring Barbra Streisand.
STREISAND: [singing] Happy days are here again. The skies above are clear again.
HORSLEY: OK, that's actually a CD. But the people who ponied up $2,500 bucks last night got to hear Streisand in person. The two events brought in some $9 million, on top of the record $66 million Obama raised last month. But because he passed up public financing, Sheila Krumholz of the watchdog Center for Responsive Politics says Obama will have to keep up this pace to stay competitive with McCain and the Republican National Committee.
KRUMHOLZ [audio clip]: Obama has raised more than twice what McCain has, but the picture is less lopsided when you consider the amount of money the parties can spend for their respective candidates.
HORSLEY: That means Obama will be spending some valuable campaign time in non-swing states, like California, raising money and talking about yours. Scott Horsley, NPR News, Beverly Hills.
From Greene's report on the September 17 edition of Morning Edition:
GREENE: I'm David Greene, traveling with Senator McCain, who had some things to say about Obama's fundraiser out in Beverly Hills.
McCAIN [audio clip]: He talked about siding with the people, siding with the people, just before he flew off to Hollywood for a fundraiser with Barbra Streisand and his celebrity friends. Let me tell you, my friends, there's no place I'd rather be than here with the working men and women of Ohio.
GREENE: McCain was in an airport hanger in Vienna, Ohio, outside Youngstown. The event yesterday afternoon reunited McCain with his running mate, Sarah Palin. She also went after Obama.
PALIN [audio clip]: Now, I know that there are a lot of small towns in this beautiful valley, and folks here don't quite know what to make of a candidate like our opponent, who has lavished praise on working people when they're listening, and then talks about, though, how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns, when those people aren't listening. We all tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Vienna or Youngstown, and then another way in San Francisco.
GREENE: Palin was pointing to a comment Obama made at a fundraiser back in April. She kept hammering the theme of Obama not being on the side of working families.
PALIN [audio clip]: There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you.
GREENE: John McCain, Palin said, is the candidate voters should trust to deal with the current turmoil on Wall Street. And McCain's been talking about solutions. He said yesterday that he'd set up a high-profile body, much like the 9-11 Commission, to study the economic crisis, and he called for tighter federal regulations on Wall Street.
[...]
GRENE: These days, McCain's speeches are all about the economy. They come to an end with barely a mention of the war or foreign policy.
McCAIN [audio clip]: We need to carry the state of Florida, and with your help, we will do that. And I will support -- thank you for your support.
GREENE: Oh, and there's also no Barbra Streisand music. David Greene, NPR News, traveling with the McCain campaign.
From the September 16 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:
CROWLEY: From Golden, Colorado, Obama went straight to Hollywood, California, where he will be at a couple of fundraisers tonight for his own campaign and for the Democratic Party. One of those fundraisers, Lou, $28,500 a head. That was too good for John McCain to pass up. He told one crowd he'd rather be talking to working class men and women in Ohio. Lou.
DOBBS: Yeah, that is a little hard to square up, isn't it -- $28,500 a plate versus the populist message that both of these candidates, by the way, have discovered, Candy? I think that's fascinating that the people are starting to get some notice from both candidates.
CROWLEY: Well, there's nothing like a crisis on Wall Street to kind of focus the mind and to have people -- have them both come out with plans saying here's what I would do.
















Well, there's nothing like a crisis on Wall Street to kind of focus the mind - Crowley
Aren't we at war?
Funny how people stop being so afraid of the terrorists when their financial well-being is at stake.
What you guys don’t seem to realize is that it *was* the cost per plate that made it a big news story, especially given Obama’s populist message.
I'm not talking about those childish socialism barbs that you're told to say about progressive populism. I'm asking can you describe progressive populism on its own merits and offer a valid refutation?
Yes sir,
Early on, Obama was loosing the blue color vote that he needed, so he spruced up his message to include verbiage along the lines of ‘educational opportunity’, ‘lack of health care’, and ‘substandard or unavailable housing’. In essence; his position is that he’s running against the things that make life hard for the average American. I.e., the populace.
But which Obama is holding true to his word to use only public campaign funds? The one clinking champagne glasses with Babs or the one who in the spring promised to clean up campaign fundraising?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/opinion/20brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Senator Obama is saving the taxpayer money ... I applaud him for that. With the way the administration of Failure-in-Chief Bush is wasting money, month after month, we can use all the help we can get. Now back on topic from your diversion.
What is your opinion of the hypocrisy of McSame having a recent fundraiser in Beverly Hills with the Hollywood elite, but criticizing Senator Obama for having one with Barbra Streisand?
sfismad,
Sooooo sorry, I believe that you are missing the boat here. If you agree to taking any government money, you are correct when you say you have had to gathered a certain amount of money. Getting that also relates to the portion of votes you get.
But, both candidates are refusing to take public funding because it limits the amount of money you can EXPEND. Remember how Media Matters (for very little) took issue because of a ruling by the FEC that McCain had withdrawn his request for public funding, so much that MMfvl took a hissy? That was because McCain would no longer be limited to what he could EXPEND.
Before both had the momentum that would propel them to victories in the primaries and the accompanying fundraising power, they thought the public system was fine.
So here's to not pigging out, with lipstick or otherwise, at the public trough! "Now, Michael Moore, please stop hogging the escargau and left the buffet!"
Remember how Media Matters (for very little) took issue because of a ruling by the FEC that McCain had withdrawn his request for public funding, so much that MMfvl took a hissy?
Actually, that is because McSame was breaking campaign finance law. I realize Republicans breaking the law isn't a big deal to you, but it is to some of us. Again, nice try at diversion, but back to the topic of the thread ...
What is your opinion of the hypocrisy of McSame having a recent fundraiser in Beverly Hills with the Hollywood elite, but criticizing Senator Obama for having one with Barbra Streisand?
I realize Republicans breaking the law isn't a big deal to you
It isn't even news any more.
You're a liar, or you're misinformed.
Obama never promised to use only to use ONLY public campaign funds.
Why? Because no candidate can run using only public funds. The only way to qualify for the public finance subsidy is to raise a specified amount of money privately.
There's also the possibility that he's both.
petra & petrified,
Just listen to the clip... http://www.publicampaign.org/node/35376/
And if that wasn't bad enough...... http://thepage.time.com/mccain-camp-timeline-of-obama-and-public-funding/
What you said is still not true.
"Using the public campaign finance system" and "us[ing] only public campaign funds" are not the same thing.
You accused Obama of promising to use only public money, which is impossible.
If you meant something else, just say it.
*Sigh*
Here we go again with this nonsense. Fortunately, I have a response that I've posted elsewhere on MMFA. I will re-post it here in deference to the slow people like PROUDCONSERVATIVE:
In choosing not to take public financing, Obama did absolutely nothing illegal, unethical, or dishonest.
His agreement to accept public financing was hinged entirely on whether McCain promised to do so as well. John McCain signed a binding agreement with the FEC back in August 2007 to accept spending limits for the primary and to abide by the conditions of receiving matching funds. To get out of that agreement the FEC must grant permission. In December he pledged to use his matching funds as collateral for a private loan to keep his campaign afloat.
Once McCain ditched public funds (illegally, after having secured a loan against the funds), Obama was free to do whatever he thought was best for his campaign.
This is much ado about nothing. Obama didn’t do a d*mn thing wrong.
McCain, on the other hand, broke both the letter and the spirit of his own campaign finance law.
The rest is here, including sources:
http://tinyurl.com/3h7gy5
I agree that nothing about what Obama did is illegal, just quite the opposite from he had promised. It's just one of many takebacks he'll make as a politician. So much for change in Washington, that's all.
From the fundraiser, "Please make certain to leave your clinged to bibles and guns at door!"
He never promised anything. It was contingent upon McCain.
What's really hilariously hypocritical about this is that if Obama DID rely upon public funds, the Repubs and the MSM would be condemning him for squandering taxpayer monies!
They'd be having daily budget alerts on him, counting up all the ad buys, showing cash registers clanging with "your money" at stake.
But which Obama is holding true to his word to use only public campaign funds?
If Obama accepted public funding, you and I both know that his campaign would be outspent by the combination of Gramps McCain, the RNC, and all the slimy GOP-affiliated 527s out there (like the Swift Boat Liars). Opting out was his only choice in order to survive.
Oh ProudCon...
Please look where Sen. George McCain's bankroll is coming from before you make a post.
It might save you from a heap of embarrassment.
How's McCain going to be commander in chief if he's afraid of Barbra Streisand?
Shame on Obama's campaign for again snoozing and being late. And kudos to McCain's camp for ONCE AGAIN knowing how to control the news cycles.
Obama missed his chance when McCain held his Hollywood "elite" fundraiser. It's too late now to go back and cry about it.
We should all know by now that the press will not hold the same standard to both and will just repeat the vileness of negative ads and talking points.
Best post you've ever written.
First post you've ever understood.
not sure if I agree with you.
you can win elections by controlling the news cycle but it is the job of the citizenry to realize that they were voting on news cycles, and being worse because of it.
If they don't, they lose and have only themselves to blame for it.
I say, a democracy is only as strong as its weakest citizen.
However, McCain's Celebrity Con Man pal does not have a vote...
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080929/berman_ames
Reeeezzzzkoooo
Reeeezzzzkoooo
Pot calling the kettle black.
*NEWSFLASH*
People have been voting for the lesser of two evils for decades.
So in summary, if I stand next to GW Bush that makes me an oil man ????
Only if you're an oil man giving him money. Or it makes you a Saudi prince. But if not one of those, you're probably the next failure at whatever cabinet position he just gave you.
It's this little gotcha game the corporate media has learned to play with Democrats...
When the Cons have their big-money fundraisers it's no big deal. Just look the other way. Hey, it's just politics.
When the Democrats have a big-money fundraiser it's time to heap on the ridicule and contempt. Look at these phonies! Look at these elitists.
This is a critical strategy for NPR and the rest of the corporate media for keeping the Cons in power. The American people are way too dumb to see through it.
Scott Horsley shows us what he always has been: a corporate suck-up.
or a "moran" who voted for him just because you thought you could have a beer with him.
McCain hit the jack pot with the biggest elite fund raiser .............................
"Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it filed a formal complaint, dated April 22, 2008, with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) related to a fundraising luncheon held at London’s Spencer House to benefit Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign. The venue for the event was apparently donated to the campaign by foreign nationals, in violation of federal campaign finance laws."
Where was Crowley or CNN then?
Ignore? Look what the media is doing to Nader.
http://tinyurl.com/wechoose
Look what the media is doing to Nader.
Nader did all that to himself.
"Easy to refute wingnuts"
What the heck does that mean "he did it to himself?' The media is excluding him. When Nader shows up in polls with as much as 6%, it is simply DISHONEST to keep showing the same two clowns and act like they are the only two running. see video: Ask Steve to Change the "You Choose '08" page. See Renetto's Interview with Nader