Oh Yeah!!!!—Did Byrd drink the Kool-Aid?
The Kool-Aid must be strong today. News is breaking about Clinton’s former campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle (more about that later). But earlier today there was the news that despite a 41 point victory by Hillary Clinton in his state of WV, Senator Robert Byrd has decided to endorse Obama. There are many reasons to suspect that the longest serving Senator (50 years) may have been dosed with the Kool-Aid, but I think there are some more practical reasons the Senator may be joining the Obama “brand”.
Let’s take a look at where the Senator got a lot of his money from in the last election cycle:
:
| Top Contributors to Robert C. Byrd (D) during the 2006 Election Cycle | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rank | Donor | Amount (US Dollars) |
| 1 | Moveon.org | $ 88,615 |
| 2 | West Virginia Paving | $ 26,500 |
| 3 | Mylan Laboratories | $ 24,600 |
| 4 | Cassidy & Assoc/Interpublic Group | $ 22,188 |
| 5 | Azimuth Inc | $ 20,800 |
| Source: The Center for Responsive Politics’ www.OpenSecrets.org site. Note: Contributions are not from the organizations themselves, but are rather from the organization’s PAC, employees or owners. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates. |
||
So MoveOn.org, one of Obama’s biggest money machines, is also responsible for donating over three times as much money to Byrd’s last campaign than the next closest donor. I wonder if that has anything to do with his willingness to shoot the bird at the VAST majority of his constituents. I mean Byrd is 90 years old, and his latest term doesn’t end for 4 years. I’m pretty sure he’s not too worried about his next election, but I’d bet he has a legacy candidate waiting in the wings who would love to be able to benefit from MoveOn’s generosity. Especially in an open election that for Republicans will be competitive for the first time in years.
Byrd also loves the pork, and he’s no friend to open and transparent government. HIllary, on the other hand, has strongly advocated openness during the campaign, most specifically in her 10 point plan for increasing transparency and reducing corruption in government:
- Banning Cabinet officials from lobbying a Hillary Clinton administration.
- Strengthening whistleblower protections.
- Creating a public service academy.
- Ending abuse of no-bid government contracts and posting all contracts online.
- Cutting 500,000 government contractors.
- Restoring the Office of Technology Assessment.
- Publishing budgets for every government agency.
- Implementing Results America Initiative to track government effectiveness.
- Tracking and eliminating corporate welfare.
- Expanding voting access and safeguarding voting machines.
Like Byrd, I don’t think Obama is a big fan of transparency either. I’m sure he doesn’t want people finding out where his money is coming from really. Notice the bottom of the chart above. The money doesn’t actually come from these organizations, it is from their PAC’s, employees, and owners. That way you don’t have to say you are beholden to the actual organization. Anyone remember Barry’s silly claims that he doesn’t take money from the oil companies? (nobody does, it’s illegal) I’ll bet he takes a lot from those oil company’s “employees” though. But back to Byrd, like I said, he is no friend to transparency. Back before Josh “went missing”, TPM reported that Byrd had been behind a secret hold on a bill to make government spending transparent:
That’s right: Byrd, whose penchant for pork would probably win him the Pork Crown if he weren’t saddled with minority status, has for days declined to answer constituents and others who have asked if he put a hold on the spending database proposal, S. 2590.
And, yes, I know that Obama and Clinton both co-sponsored S. 2590, but Obama has never seemed very interested in his own constituents, much less bringing pork back to them. It was always about his aspiration to be President. Obama only cares about blurring information concerning his campaign contributions, Byrd doesn’t like any transparency at all when it comes to money. As far as campaign contributions and government transparency, I guess it’s true what they say about “Byrds” of a feather.
Filed under: Barack Obama, General, Hillary Clinton, Politics, Presidential Election 2008 | Tagged: Obama endorsement, Robert Byrd, superdelegates, West Virginia
The people of WV chose the populist with a clean energy plan. Its their mountains being removed. Its their kids suffering the lack of clean water and clean air.
Byrd is beholden to King Coal.
Of course he would support Republican-lite - Obama.
Hill has earned more than 435k votes than BO since the beginning of march.
More votes than Obama, that should say.
When she made her victory speech last Tuesday, he was in the audience and she thanked him for his support. Did I dream that? I must have, because I don’t understand how anyone can be so blatantly two-faced. Oh, yes can. This is the democratic party in 2008. Their motto: “White House be damned. Drive the Clintons and all of their riff-raff out at any cost!”
Please, Hillary. Declare as an Independent and give us a real choice. We’ll support you all the way.
Wasn’t Byrd linked with the KKK at one time. Wouldn’t his endorsement wash away his “sins”? I think a lot of BO’s support is the “see I’m not a racist” type. I’ve observed this in a number of people now. I find this amazing really. For some people it is all about the not racist stand. Nothing else. It makes me look at them in a whole new way.
I recall a 60 Minutes episode (probably 20+ years ago) that told how WV got the biggest chunk of federal highway money because Byrd was the Transportation committee chair.
West Virginia Paving?
yeah, I don’t think any of those companies are very eco-friendly, like DC said….I would guess the rest of those companies are in some way tied to coal/energy
If, based on Gary’s research, Gore comes out in favor of Obama then there is not question or doubt that the fix is in. How this senator, whose state went overwhelmingly in support of Hillary, could turn his back on his constituents, is mind boggling.
Mylan is a pharmaceutical company. My under-educated guess would be that pharma is more in favor of the candidate with the weaker health plan.
@Linda: That is one of many reasons why I think Latinos, like myself, and Asians can see past Obama’s empty rhetoric and see an unworthy candidate: we don’t suffer from “guilt,” which allows us to scrutinize him without fear of feeling like we’re racists.
The sad part about all this is that these whites are being quite racist in voting for Obama on the basis of skin color, largely ignoring merit. I have felt this “soft bigotry of low expectations” and it is no less offensive than overt racism; worse, it sets you up for failure.
Ellen,
Obama has huge support from big Pharma, as does Hillary. The difference is that Hillary would be in a better position–and more willing–to stand up to them. Obama already rolled over to the drug and insurance co’s in IL. when he helped them rewrite the children’s insurance legislation.
guys, we got linked from politico. Expect some heavy incoming. Actually, they’re going to the sweeties post from yesterday but they may start to spread.
I have to head home in a minute. Just thought you should be aware.
Thanks, bostonboomer.
Sounds like more of that wonderful work BO did in IL.
Azimuth sounds to me like mining … see dotcommodity’s post.
OT, but I just caught part of a brief segment on David Gregory’s show. Yes, I know I’m not supposed to be watching, but I quickly switched to the animal channel. Anyway, they were discussing how women are rebelling against voting for Obama, and what can the Precious do to win us back?
Get this–Rachael Maddow threw out a bunch of treats about Roe vs. Wade. Then I switched it off, but the thing is–they are talking about it, I guess because of the NYT story today.
Can she declare as an Independant now?
Isn’t it past filing time? And how ironic.
She’s the only Democrat in this race.
RD,
I deleted some profane posts already and put some other in the spam filter in case you wanted to look at them. I’ll keep it under control.
So, we’re getting attention are we? Bring. It. On.
Wow, rd,
I wondered why suddenly all the heavy hate on a post from a day ago.
I could be wrong, but I don’t believe Gore will make an endorsement of either candidate. On the other hand, I’ve been very surprised by some who’ve came out for Obama already.
OT, but a while ago, I was watching an old episode of “Leave It To Beaver”. Ward said to Beaver, “Sometimes you can try so hard to be smart that you end up doing stupid things.” In unison, my husband and I said, “Like voting for Obama.” Great minds think alike.
BB: Why thank you very much. I may just put my hip waders on and go rummaging through the swill. It’s always entertaining.
Robert Byrd is a 500 yr old punk.
News is breaking about Clinton’s former campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle (more about that later).
Later later?
I would not be so quick to dismiss donations from employees. Isn’t there a rule in campaign donations that if you are giving more than a certain amount (I think its low, like $200 or something) you have to declare who your employer is? PACs/owners; sure that pretty easy to criticize but lumping employees in there with politically motivated corporate money is not fair (to the candidate or the employees). Unfortunately, that is how the data from that website is aggregated.
You are probably right about Byrd; his funding probably did play a role in his endorsement. Part of the problem is that, while not unreasonable, the suggestion that moveon.org is not acting independently but taking suggestions (or orders) from BO is unsubstantiated. This idea is of course a two way street. Again, while the suggestion that Patti Solis Doyle did it because HRC asked her is not unreasonable, it is unsubstantiated.
That site giving us the scoop on Byrd was interesting. Another interesting thing on the site is that it rates BO’s “quality of disclosure” higher than HRC’s (89% vs. 93.8%). He co-sponsored S.2590 (along with 47 other people apparently). I’ll be honest, I have no clue what their quality of disclosure measure really means but I have to ask the follow up question: is there really a significant difference between the financing sources of these two candidates? There is a lot of info on that site and it would be kind of easy to cherry-pick the figures one wanted (it is a cool site though, I recommend spending a few minutes there).
And if you think WV Senators lorve them some coal, wait till you see KY, my guess is the people will go Clinton, the Supers will go Obama after seeing his ad for their clean Kentucky coal:
http://envirowonk.com/content/view/191/1/
I hope he lets Patti run his campaign into the ground, too. Who was the brilliant guy who told Hillary to pull out of Iowa early? I think we are all getting rather immune to all the back stabbing turncoats. Patti probably needs the money. As for the rest of us, Obama will never have enough money to get our votes back.
There is a link to public information regarding $$$ being given to Super D’s by the candidates. I saw the link at TL - I opened it. My congress critter is Heath Shuler. BO gave him $10,000, Hillary gave him -0- as of March 20, 2008. Shuler has endorsed Hillary.
Doing a quick eyeball of the figures up to that date - BO has paid out 3 million, Hillary less than half. Sorry I don’t have the link, but I sure would like to see figures that are up to date.
This gives new meaning to elections can be bought. What a marvelous way to “elect” a president.
Once again, thanks Gary for your great post on this. BO is spending 4:1 against McCain and 3:1 against Hillary - and he still can’t close.
If anyone has a link to the updated list of $$$ to super d’s - I’d really like to see it.
OK, here’s a thought, are they endorsing BO because they are afraid of the netroots and unaware of the netroots 2.0 spurred on by the alienation of Hill supporters in netroots 1.0?
This Robert Byrd = Coal Man endorsement goes perfectly with DotCommodity’s post how he/she breaks down Obama’s heinous NUCULAR, COAL & OIL energy plan.
This is all making sense.
Gary, I hope your post goes viral!!!
No vote for Obama, we want Chelsea’s mama!
Major impact - The March 29, 2005 MoveOn fundraising letter under Obama’s signature, which raised an amazing over $800K for Byrd’s campaign in 48 hours.
Personally, I hold Sen. Byrd in high regard, and I’m disappointed in his decision.
It’s disappointing. I’m sure the move on money is part of it, but Byrd has to like Obama’s position on coal.
Someone tell me please, what’s the story on patty solis doyle? I don’t know what you are talking about.
Byrd also received $10,000 from the PAC run by Obama in 2006. the HOPE fund (don’cha know)
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?
cmte=C00409052&cycle=2006
Byrd also received $10,000 from the PAC run by one Barack Obama in 2006. (the HOPE Fund …don’cha know
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00409052&cycle=2006
Have I been bad??
I’ve tried to post a comment twice and nothing …
What i’ve tried to say is that Robery Byrd was the recipient of $10k from Barack Obama’s PAC in 2006.
It was named the HOPE Fund.
I also tried to include the link. (opensecrets dot org then look up HOPE Fund)
Robery = Robert
I don’t know what the story is about Patty Solis Doyle either. But I just heard on the radio that her brother (a BO supporter) is an alderman in chicago…. Yet another link to the Chicago political mob.
Leslie, A couple of your comments ended up in the spam filter. It might have been the links, I don’t know. I released them.
I read something years ago, and I can’t remember the exact wording but it said that Byrd has established so many federal government offices in WV that the state resembles a government in exile.
it’s probably good that he waited to endorse until after the primary, anyway.
bb~ thanks
i’ve been working from home tonight, and not paying much attention for the past hours.
Kayla ~ Last week I saw more than one article about the HUGE contributions from the banking industry and Wall street bundlers. I think you have been sorely mistaken or mis-led by your guy. Please follow wome of this links you see here and at other sites. Don’t just rely on what Mr Obama or his handlers tell you.
That said, I know many people who speak about the small donations to Obama, but they haven’t given a farthing. I’d start really exploring before pointing fingers. (In the beginning, it may have been true that Hillary had more big money. But these days, It just ain’t so.
follow the money
you’re against bribing superdelgates and big money contributions and you’re an Obama supporter?
good thing obama’s change and inspiration is inherent in him and completely divorced from his actual record of sleaze and disenfranchisment.
here’s my series on Obama’s bundlers:
Lobbyist Connections
Code Pink
Oil & Gas Connections
Reed Hundt & Ari Emanuel
Obama takes money from lobbyists and he has gotten more money from energy companies than anyone else.
Kayla: Buy a new shtick, the one you’ve got stinks
No, i think the entire dirty system should change, but obama’s spent how much money is it now bribing superdelegates? once again, it’s the obama rules, obama is the clean change candidate, so much so that it supercedes his lack of experience, lack of policy knowledge, Nixonian disregard for the voters, but when he’s not, hey, he’s just a politician! hillary probably does whatever sleazy thing he’s doing too!
“His last rally drew 75,000 people. How many people attended Hillary’s last speaking engagement?”
Are you joking? this might work on the typical kool-ade drinker, but not here. Obama couldn’t fill a rally in a bathroom stall. Busing in tens of thousands of paid “vounteers” isn’t filling a rally. i mean, yes, Obama is running a grass roots, bottom up campaign. Hillary may attract all rank and file Democratic consttuencies, but obama gets the demographics that matter–wealthy people who aren’t Republicans, bloggers, and media elites. If we could disenfranchise everyone but the MSNBC press room in the GE–uh, we’d still lose to Mccain with obama as the nominee, but it would be close.
“Those numbers represent grassroots empowerment, not disenfranchisement.’
Um…yes. “Hey, it’s not that we’re not letting you vote, it’s that we paid several thousand people to attend a rally! So it’s not disenfranchsisement!” Your logic in unimpeachable. how many people to you have to pay to attend rallies to cancel out the number of votes you’ve suppressed, because i’m really confused now. I’d like to ask, however, how much do you pay per rally? Is it full time?
God, are there people in the world stupid enough to fall for these arguments or is this just more of the Obama MO of assuming everyone in teh US is stupid enough to fall for their bs?
“Even when Obama was far behind at the beginning of the race he saw it as a challenge and drew up a plan to meet the challenge”
Um…yeah. He’s a real campaigning genius, that guy. What was his plan–to alienate virtually everyone the democrats need to win in november? Unfortunately for Obama, his plan depends on absolute media beatification combined with demonization of his opponent, disenfranchsing states, and as many caucuses as possible, and hopefully nobody caring that he has no significant support in the party and can’t win a major state. it’s, um, going to take more power than i suspect howard and Donna have to make the strategy fly in the general.
“Hillary’s increasingly ambitious attempts to redefine basic campaign metrics such as the “popular vote”
Yes, you got something there. There’s nothing on earth more ambiguous than vote tallies. the idea, the very idea, that a party that takes its name from democracy should care about democratic practices! Caring about the rights of people who we all know are ignorant, toothless, bitter rubes is the definition of lack of integrity. Moreover, it’s a Republican idea! In the Republican party, the popular vote actually matters in the allocation of delegates, and they represent all states! So the idea of the popular vote is in itself fascist. It’s disgusting enough that those rubes are allowed to befoul our sacred ballots with their touch, but what’s worse is that anyone should be expected to “care.” *shudder* redefining basic campaign metrics such as ‘the popular vote’ (fear my scare quotes) would be as dark a day as when we transitioned to direct election of senators. In the future, we will put this sham to rest entirely by granting the franchise only to john aravosis, william ayres’ energy company executive father, and the chairman of the Princeton philosophy department.
You’d think, though, that with those big rallies that represent grassroots empowerment and cancel out all the disenfranchisement, obama would not have to worry so much about the popular vote, or even about how far he’s behind among democrats alone. Too bad we can’t turn rallies into voting opportinities–hey, give me a call, i’d like a job and promise to go from rally to rally voting at every one (for a price, of course) to make our point.
Kayla: After playing whack-a-mole with an endless succession of Obot trolls, I’m all out of thoughtful retorts. You’ll have to settle for rude.
Happy trails!
Kayla,
Surely you know that just like Obama has outspent Clinton all through the campaign he has also given Superdelegates tons of more money than she has, both now and the last few years. I would also urge you to look at the link Leslie gave you above.
Now what was your point?