The Washington Post's Two Versions of Obama's Campaign Fundraising

The first version entitled, Big Donors Drive Obama's Money Edge, says the internet was not the only source of Obama's campaign donations.

"Interest among major party donors grew so fevered that the Democratic
Party created a separate committee to capture millions of additional dollars
from individuals who had already given Obama the most the law
allows..."

The maximum donation allowed for the "Obama Victory Fund" is $28,500, so the DNC created the "Committee for Change".

"The Committee for Change has quietly accepted millions more, in checks
ranging from $5,000 to $66,900, from celebrities, corporate titans, Native
American tribes and several of Obama's most ardent bundlers."

This enables soft money donors to contribute to "each facet of the Obama fundraising machine".

The Crown Family of Chicago

"longtime Obama patrons, are among a handful who have given across the
board: They raised more than $500,000 for Obama's campaign, they collectively
gave $18,500 directly to the campaign, they donated $57,000 to the Victory Fund,
and they sent $74,000 to the Committee for Change.
"By both raising the most
money and donating to every committee, they become double big players,"

There are always loopholes for big money donors.

Less than 1/4 of Obama's $600,000 raised has come from donations of $200 or less.

The RNC has separate committees as well, but they are not claiming that most of their money has come from small donations as Obama has claimed.

Contrast this article with today's WaPo editorial entitled, $150 Million Man. This article says that Obama's $600,000 in compaign donations are not

"evidence of the pernicious return of big money to federal
campaigns....Much of Mr. Obama's money has arrived in small donations; in any
event, donors are limited to a maximum of $4,600 ($2,300 each for the primary
and general election). Mr. Obama's haul reflects the enormous enthusiasm his
campaign has generated".

Give me a break. I'm laughing so hard I can't see straight. Enormous enthusiasm? Come on. Enormous enthusiasm of big money donors is more accurate.

WaPo is troubled that Obama went back on his word to accept public financing and wonders if Obama's flip-flop is a matter of ethics.

One does wonder about the ethics of it all. And, one wonders why the Washington Post would publish two such contradictory articles.

Hmmm.....ethics.