• John Morgan
    Blog Owner
  • Kirk Wentzel
  • Peter Bonny Jr.
  • Michael P

Blog Ads

  • To advertise on this blog please contact the owner through the "Email Me" link.
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 09/2006
Recently on this blog
Recently on other blogs

« Clinton Campaign: "We Support Congressman Kanjorski" | Main | Madeline Albright Campaigns For Clinton at KU »

April 09, 2008



John, I almost cry for Hillary after reading this. Bill and Chelsea and the entire mechpucha of the Clintons running in this election. Same playing field? Did anyone shed any tears for Obama or any other candidate as early as last Dec. about the level playing field, finance-wise, aparatus-wise? And why should anyone be sheding tears for Clintons about some few mills when they are worth some $100M and can easily level the field?

Saying that, I have not a single doubt that Clinton will win PA by at least 10. All she needs to do is to remind wonderful PA populi that Obama is black and unpatriotic. She just can't do it often enough. Hence, the recent polling. But wait, in the last week you'll see the same crap you saw in OH.

John Morgan

Understand Peter, I'm simply commenting on the facts here. The ad is misleading but Obama continues to run it in PA. He's left himself vulnerable to this attack.

As for the disparity in financing, I wasn't commiserating with the Clinton campaign, just commenting on the fact they say they can compete but it seems they're on a different playing field than Obama. That's analysis.


I don't know if it was misleading. If it was, it's a fair game to attack it.

The fact that Obama came from well behind is the reflection on this campaign. Clinton's base is much less enthusiastic. Some of it already gave up and don;t want to waste money. Also, much of her base just dislike Obama's skin color: they're ready to vote against him but they are not ready to donate.

John Morgan

It was patently misleading. Obama says vote for him because he doesn't take money from oil companies. No one can.


Oh, I thought there's more to that. If that's all, it's all just about semantic, Clinton's ad has no real legs. Which is why it is only on the radio.

For the real ads that will damage Obama, you should wait for the last 5 days of campaign when OH kitchen sink will be repeated, with racist overtones and unpatriotic accusations from Bill and Hill. They will not dissapoint you, John.

John Morgan

I've criticized both sides in this campaign when and where I see fit. The bigger problem I had with the Obama commercial wasn't so mush with this claim as his saying he will wean us off foreign oil. That's a pipe dream (pun intended). That'll never happen because demand is always increasing. Even if we aggressively pursue alternative and renewable energy sources we'll always be dependent on foreign oil.


any chance of us drilling our own vast reserves to reduce if not eliminate our dependency on foreign sources?


John Morgan

No. Our consumption of oil is huge. We'd never have enough. Add to that the constant increases and this will not happen in our lifetimes because we don't have the political will to really do what is necessary. Americans are too in love with their cars, SUV's, travel etc. We should demand all new construction be green, use geothermal for heating and AC, solar panels on every roof, biofuels, etc. We won't do it however. If we did we could significantly reduce our dependence but we won't eliminate it.


Where are the HRC fans on this blog?


John Morgan

Good question EJ. The blogosphere, as a whole, hasn't been supportive of Hillary so maybe they're apprehensive. The tone of some of the comments left here by some Obama supporters may have some Hillary fans put off also. I am in the process of banning the more abusive ones and if this mean tone persists among them more may get added to the list. I'm at the point where my patience has run out and if we can't all keep it civil then I won't let certain people comment.

Let's everyone have a little respect for one another. If you cannot you won't be able to comment any longer. So, Clinton supporters come forward if you wish.


Since we're on the subject of misleading ads, here's some info re: Clinton's current radio spot re: that 2005 Energy Bill:
Here is info from
Fact Check: "We've Called Clinton On This Once Before... The Highly Publicized Energy Bill The President Signed In 2005 Raised Taxes Slightly On The Oil Industry As A Whole. It's true that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 contained $14.3 billion in tax breaks, but most of those breaks were for electric utilities, nuclear power plants, alternative fuels research and subsidies for energy efficient cars and homes. Actually, the highly publicized energy bill the president signed in 2005 raised taxes slightly on the oil industry as a whole, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service."
[, 1/6/08;, 7/25/07]

Here are the TRUE facts about the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill aka Energy Policy Act of 2005:

From AP:
AP reported, "Clinton is on shakier ground when attacking Obama for supporting "Dick Cheney's energy bill," and not just because it's a stretch to assign the vice president name - red meat to Democrats - to the legislation. The 2005 act that she describes as packed with billions of dollars in oil industry breaks actually raised taxes on the oil and gas industry by about $300 million over 11 years, according to the Congressional Research Service. The nonpartisan analysis found $2.6 billion in tax cuts for the oil and gas industry and $2.9 billion in tax increases. The bulk of tax breaks went to other sources of energy, including alternative fuels favored by both Clinton and Obama." [AP, 2/15/08]

Obama played a leadership role in promoting seven amendments that strengthened the 2005 bill when it was on the floor and did not stop fighting to strengthen the bill after it was passed, introducing legislation in 2007 to end some of the most egregious tax breaks for the oil industry that were part of the 2005 bill.
[HR 6, Vote 139, 6/15/06; SA 851 to HR 6, Passed by UC, 6/23/05; HR 6, Vote 141, 6/16/05; HR 6, Vote 145, 6/21/05; SA 919 to HR 6, Passed by UC, 6/23/05; 110th, S. 115, Referred to Finance, 1/4/07; S. 133,
Introduced 1/4/07; S. 767, Passed Commerce Committee, 5/8/07]

2005-2007: Obama Introduced Legislation Repealing Tax Breaks And Other Perks For the Oil Industry, Requiring Yearly Increases In CAFE Standards, And Requiring Significant Increases In Renewable Fuel
Mandates And Alternative Energy Incentives. Since 2005, Obama has introduced legislation suspending the 2005 energy bill's tax incentives and other perks for the oil industry in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, requiring significant increases in the renewable fuel mandates over the next few years, requiring yearly increases in CAFÉ standards, and providing incentives for E-85 fuel pump installation,
alternative vehicle research and production. [S. 115, 110th Congress; S. 23, 110th Congress; S. 133, Introduced 1/4/07; S. 2202, Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
10/18/2007 S. 2984, 109th Congress; S. 1324, Introduced 5/7/07; Press Release, 5/7/07]

If anyone wants to see more details on the bill:


When you go to the booth - remember this=

Who signed NAFTA into law with the help of his wife
Which candidate's chief advisor was caught trying to expand NAFTA?
He was only demoted after the press found out.
Which candidate says boycott china, yet her husbands library, our homes were mortgaged by foreign interests.
Which candidate has been caught receiving millions from lobbyist?To include the medical industry.
At the risk of offending you which candidate did not verify a medical story speech she used till caught by the press. And what about those snipers?
Pennsylvania you can do something great- Vote for Change


Let's see if we can make this simple, so everyone can understand. Oil companies have PACs. PACs can give money to candidates, but Obama does not take any money from PACs. Thus, Obama does not take any money from oil companies.

On the other hand, from 1999 thru the 2/29/08 FEC filings, Hillary has taken $4,375,916 in PAC contributions. In the 2008 election cycle alone, she has taken $1,192,337 in PAC contributions, and has given no indication she will stop taking PAC contributions.

So, truly...this IS a matter of semantics, people. Let's not try to pretend we don't recognize which of the candidates has a leg to stand on this issue. I think we all know who can lay a better claim to NOT having exposed themselves to the potential of big business influences, okay?

John Morgan

Obama's ad doesn't mention oil company PAC's. He says he doesn't take money from oil companies. Period. That's misleading.

According to the Clinton campaign he does take money from oil industry executives though. $213,000 worth.

My question is are these a large number of smaller donations or large, maxxed out contributions. Just because someone works at a company doesn't necessarily mean their contributions are tied tot heir industry. That depends on the level of their job, their influence at the company and their intention in giving the money. Industry executives who give large amounts, in my opinion, are far more suspect than regular workers who contribute in smaller amounts over time. e.g. a normal worker who gives $50/month for example.


SCRIPT – “Fill”

Across Pennsylvania, we're living the problems.

An economy in shambles. Families struggling. Gas prices close to four dollars a gallon.

What's Hillary Clinton's answer?

Misleading negative ads.

Here's the truth.

While she's played political games, it's Barack Obama who's taken on the oil companies, demanding higher gas mileage standards and a larger investment in alternative energy.

It's Obama who's worked to strip tax breaks from the oil giants as they roll up record profits.

And he's the only candidate who doesn't take a dime from oil company PACs or lobbyists. The only one.

The Federal Election Commission reports that Clinton's taken more from Big Oil and other PACs and lobbyists than any other candidate, Democrat or Republican.

The same old Washington politics isn't going to lift our economy or bring down gas prices.

So if you've had your fill of that...

Vote for change we can believe in, Barack Obama for President.

The comments to this entry are closed.