372,039 Problems with Anonymous "Insiders"
To live up to a title like that, this post would need to rattle on for for a few pages, at least. But I wanted to point out that a few weeks ago, an anonymous commenter assured us that Jeff Harris was out of money, and would not last until the primary. Without even bothering to call the Harris campaign and check on his finances, I offered to place a bet on that proposition. Naturally, the anonymous commenter refused to back the factual allegation with any proof, or even a few bucks.
Tuesday, the campaign reports came out, showing that Harris has $372,039.11 in cash on hand. I wish I were "out of money" like that! While it's true that Koster has him beat in cash on hand, we have to remember that Koster took a ton of money from right wing interest groups, and that money is likely to cost him votes. Koster's also borrowed half of the difference between them, so the gap isn't quite as large as it appears. As for Donnelly, her lead over Harris is composed entirely of debt.
My point is not to downplay the importance of the money in this race - money is clearly crucial in a statewide race, and I strongly encourage all Missourians who want a Democratic Attorney General with experience to head over to Jeff Harris' site immediately and make a donation.
My point is that when anonymous commenters start providing "facts" without sources, set your BS filter to "high". We were lied to by someone supporting Koster.
Labels: attorney general, donnelly, Jeff Harris, koster
posted by Dan at 1/17/2008 07:50:00 AM
17 Comments:
Who raised the most this quarter? Koster, Harris, or Donnelly?
Go look it up. The reports are at the Missouri Ethics Commission - Dan has the link right there on the left side.
Is the candidate that has the most friends with the deepest pockets the best choice for the job?
We, the people, need to figure out a way to reform campaign finance.
He who has the most money will usually be able to do the best job of marketing themselves. If we don't figure out a way to limit the amount of money that can be spent on a campaign, we are doomed to being ruled by the rich.
The change is going to need to come from those of us on the outside. Those of us without a dog in the fight.
Koster outraised Harris and Donnely by about $80,000 this past quarter. In fact his $750,000 COH does not include the $400,000 he refunded from over the limits.
Dan raked him over the coals for taking money over the limit and thinking he was above the law. He then praised Kander for returning the excess. When will Dan acknowledge Koster for returning the money and not filing a hardship? He'll probably say, "why should I praise him for following the law?" - I don't know, why did you praise Kander?
I agree. Dan, it sure would be nice if you were somewhat fair and objective once in a while. Lately your blog has been about as fair and balanced as my least favorite news outlet. You should of course express your opinions - this is YOUR blog - but, dude, please try for some objectivity.
Whistleblower -
Interesting points, and I don't disagree, but the prospect of public campaign finance seems pretty slim.
Anonymice -
I'm being perfectly consistent, and I suspect your own pro-Koster bias prevents you from seeing that. The point is that Kander got out in front of the issue, returned the money promptly and didn't fight it. Koster fought it tooth and nail, even arguing that his bad faith shell game with Rex was an example of why the law needs to be changed (he may be right on that - he's not the only Republican who is willing to trade integrity for Republican dollars). There are worlds of difference between the way Koster and Kander handled the situation, and if you have both knowledge and integrity, you'll agree that their behavior is not comparable in regard to over-the-limit contributions.
And that, my anonymous complainer, is the objective truth.
Donnelly has been in the race half as long as Harris. During the two fundraising quarters that Donnely has been running, she has raised more than Harris even when you subtract her loan. And even though Harris has been running for AG longer he only has 100 more donors than Donnelly. 1200 to 1100. Appears to me that Donnelly is running a pretty good campaign so far.
I know Dan's Harris bias blinds him to reason, but you have to compare apples to apples.
PS Dan, Donnelly hasnt lost her lawsuit against the Ethics Commission. She just lost the ruling for the TRO. The case is still ongoing and regardless of winning or losing, Government should be open and not behind closed doors and even Harris would agree with Donnelly on that.
Almost everybody would agree with that sentiment, but not everyone would be foolish enough to file a lawsuit based on it, without a legal basis. Of the candidates, only Donnelly advanced that flawed position, and got smacked down by the courts.
Care to place a bet on who's going to prevail? If Donnelly wins, I'll make a donation to a charity of your choice. If she loses, you make one to a charity of my choice. Email me if you really think she had a case. Because I, and the court, know she didn't.
As for your points on Donnelly's fundraising successes, I agree she's running a pretty good campaign so far. I never denied that, and your claim that I'm blind to reason is kind of strange.
And let's all remember - any of the three of them is a heck of a lot better than Gibbons.
I didn't realize Chris Koster was such a tough guy. Wow.
From the Koster website:
"Chris Koster facts:
1. If you have five dollars and Chris Koster has five dollars, Chris Koster has more money than you.
2. There is no 'ctrl' button on Chris Koster's computer. Chris Koster is always in control.
3. Apple pays Chris Koster 99 cents every time he listens to a song.
4. Chris Koster can sneeze with his eyes open.
5. Chris Koster can eat just one Lay's potato chip.
6. Chris Koster is suing Myspace for taking the name of what he calls everything around you.
7. Chris Koster destroyed the periodic table, because he only recognizes the element of surprise.
8. Chris Koster can kill two stones with one bird."
'nuff said.
"Chris Koster can charge his cell phone simply by rubbing it on one of his sideburns."
Dan...
What about a spending cap?
Heck, it worked for sports to even the playing field.
Could be based on population.
Maybe all money goes to the party and then divided by population, not to exceed cap. Money collected in excess of cap would assist other members of the party.
We've been using money as a major factor for getting elected for a long time now, and I don't think it has provided us with the best, the brightest, or the most representative of what our state has to offer.
Just a thought. Would require much more exploration.
For the record, the Porchpundit who posted on 1/17/2008 at 11:47 AM is not the Porchpundit who Dan has come to look at with disgust.
I guess some one wants to tap in on Dan's dislike for me.
This kind of thing should add so much by way of credibility to your blog Dan.
Whistleblower -
There are a lot of things that could be done to improve our campaign finance system. Caps aren't a bad idea, though you run into big problems with Constitutionality and practicality. I'm not at all criticizing your thoughts, though - I think you're addressing a fundamental issue that the rest of us prefer to ignore because the problems are too big and complex to tackle.
Porchpundit -
It's an old trick to steal someone's blog identity - it happens all the time on all the blogs. (Hint: Gloria doesn't really post on TKC.) The way I see it, we now have two porchpundits, and one of them made a sensible and helpful suggestion. The more of those the merrier.
Koster raised money from the right wing, pro-voucher corporate Republicans. Being pro-voucher is the kiss of death in a D primary.
Nixon is campaigning on 3 issues - healthcare, education and the economy. On all three, Koster sided with Blunt. Blunt & Koster kicked 100,000 people of Medicaid, Blunt & Koster pushed MOHELA through - literally stomping on Sen. Justus & UMKC, and Koster had a 100% voting record with Blunt on economic issues.
Let's face it, Koster is still running for Republican AG.
I am sure Koster will get the chance to prove he's a Democrat in the Missouri senate.
Koster led the charge to call the PQ (previous question) when Jolie Justus was filibustering the MOHEALA cluster. Check out Sen. Justus' blog called Freshmeat for a discussion of how rare - and nasty - calling the PQ is in the Missouri Senate. Koster didn't call the PQ on Matt Bartle when he was filibustering the appointment of Kit Bond's former chief of staff, Warren Erdman, to the Missouri Board of Curators. Bartle was filibustering because Erdman was pro-stem cell. Koster is pro-stem cell. Why not call the PQ on his office mate Matt Bartle? Maybe because Matt Bartle, Jeff Roe and Chris Koster were all best friends.
Koster wants to prove he's a Democrat, filibuster a Republican bill. A few other things include:
- Sign on the Justus' state earned income tax credit bill.
- Sponsor a bill to put 100,000 of our poorest back on the health care rolls (even Senator Rob Mayer (R - Dexter) didn't vote for that).
- How about telling Farm Bureau to stick it, he now thinks Clay & Platte Counties should be able to keep corporate pig farms out.
- Take some of his money and sponsor a few Democratic clubs. The Jackson County Democratic Committee needs some cash.
- Write a letter to Doug Harpool, the Democratic senate candidate in Springfield, saying "I'm sorry." Koster went down there and fundraised for Sen. Norma Champion in one of the the narrowist races in the state.
- Tell Gov. Mel Carnahan's wife he is sorry for endorsing John Ashcroft.
- Max out to some Democratic candidates for state rep in Cass County. If Koster isn't returning right wing Rex's $100,000, he should use it to help Democrats.
Wow. The Harris crowd really is getting desperate.
What makes you think so, Anonymous? The discussion of issues?
OTOH, I have to question the commenter who claims Koster "literally" stomped on Senator Justus. I'm having trouble believing that . . .
Post a Comment
<< Home