Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Acknowledging the Obvious

INSIDE THE RULES AND BYLAWS COMMITTEE MEETING -- Committee co-chair Alexis Herman, acknowledged the obvious in opening the most-anticipated gathering of her group in its history.

"This is probably the largest rules and bylaws committee meeting we have ever had," Herman, a former Labor Secretary in the Clinton Administration, said to laughter. "Usually we are applauding that our members are involved."

The roll was then called. Jim Roosevelt, the other co-chair of the committee, conducted the roll call after which he joked: "We definitely have a quorum." (All but two of the 30 members were present; one was in Iowa attending the wedding of her daughter.)

DNC Chairman Howard Dean was then tasked to deliver a broad survey of the the presidential race to date between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. "This has been a very long and hard fought race," said. "These two candidates have helped to transform our party."

Dean also touched on the historic nature of the choice before Democrats. "We are going to nominate either the first woman or the first African American to be the nominee of our party," he said. "The person we nominate will become the next president of the United States."

The arguments from the campaigns and the states are expected shortly.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 31, 2008; 9:50 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: DNC Rules Committee Showdown Begins
Next: Dean Goes After the Media


I don't usually get involved in political fact I never have done this before. But, there's something strangely disquieting about the Obama campaign that I just gotta get off my chest..

A sad, but true political axiom is that the candidate with the most money almost always wins. According to Bloomberg News Service, Obama spent more than twice as much as Clinton on TV ads since Super Tuesday (Feb 5)... Twice as much... from a guy who is a 1st time, jr senator from Illinois. His campaign spent $46 million vs Clinton's $21 million since that date. He surpassed all previous Democratic fund-raising records, taking in $256 million for the primaries through April 30, vs Clinton's $173 million (as of end-of-April her campaign was in debt about $10 million, in addition to $10 million she loaned the campaign from her own funds).

Yes, the Clintons are rich, yes the Clintons are well-connected, yes they live inside-the-belt, yes they are part of the power-elite, so I understand where their money comes from.

But, how does a guy who who lives WAY outside the belt, come up with over a QUARTER BILLION dollars in campaign financing, overwhelmingly trouncing the presumptive Clinton candidacy? I mean he didn't just beat the Clintons financially, he buried them. All this at a time when the USA is in recession, people are losing their jobs, cash liquidity and financial markets worldwide are very, very tight..hmm. Heck, I'm loathe to make campaign contributions even during the very best of times..

But don't get me wrong - I'm not a Hillary fan. Obama is smart, tough, intelligent and certainly capable - I sort of even like the guy....but the money angle confuses, and somewhat concerns me. Where did he get all that money?

There is one supply of money that wouldn't even twinkle at the amounts discussed above - yep, oil money. Specifically, oil money of the Arabic Middle East. Let's see, Iran is the 2nd biggest OPEC producer, with production volumes of 4.2 million bbls per day (that's roughly about $420 million / day). So, about 15 hrs of Iranian production would completely fund Obama's campaign. Put another way, about 5 hrs of Iranian production would fund Obama's money lead over Clinton. And given the tightness of the primary race, the money lead was probably pivotal.

Obama recently suggested that if elected, as President of the USA he would hold unconditional discussions with Iranian leaders...ok, that hasn't happened in a long, long time. And remember, he has already indicated he will quickly pull out of Iraq, if elected. Who will back-fill that vacuum? Wellll, since the Iraqi population, and current leadership is about 65% Shi'a, one can safely assume that the religious center of Shi'ites, Iran, will fill the void, particularly if they are un-opposed by a sympathetic West. IF Iran was to gain control of Iraq, they would then control nearly 1/4 of OPEC's oil supply, equating to about 20% of global oil production. Oh boy. And you think the price of gas is high now?

Ok, but Obama claims to be Christian, right? That 'Christian' church he attended, Divinity United? Not the most pro-USA church in the world...But, why would he support Iranian positions? Well, for starters, his name... his name is Barrack Hussain Obama. Hussain is the name of the grandson of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. Hussain ibn Ali is revered as the 3rd, or 2nd Imam who sacrificed his life and the lives of many family members in order to preserve the teachings and rule of Shi'a Islam. His pivotal leadership role took place in the town of Karbala, smack dab in the middle of, you guessed it, Iraq.

And of course he is the son, and step-son of Muslim fathers. This is old news, but bears repeating. Regardless of what Obama, you, me, or anyone else believes, according to Islamic law, and today's Muslim world, he IS Muslim.

Incidentally, one of Obama's primary mentors is Rashid Khalidi, a pro-Islamic Obama fund-raiser who has authored several books that fervently promote Arab nationalism, and identity.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that Obama's a closet radical with bad intent....but what if big campaign money was available, that came with silent, tempting strings attached? Well, let's just say he might give it due consideration.

Money is THE basis upon which he beat the Clinton dynasty, and will be the source for severely challenging McCain. Where does he get that money? What's that expression? Follow the money......

OK, maybe all his money is legit, but geez, doubling up on Clinton just doesn't seem reasonable, or fair.

But if some of the money does have an Arabic connection, consider this - next time you're thinking of supporting Obama's campaign election by making a donation, why not instead drive the old 6-banger down to the local gas station and fill it up. Quite possibly some of those hard-earned green-backs will find their way back to his big, and growing war-chest.

It might be a cost-effective way to donate, even if in the long run, his anomalous and fiery path to power is compromised, or worse, controlled by forces who just possibly view your country, and it's freedoms, as the 'Great Satan'. And it just might lead to 'change we have to believe in'.

Posted by: follow the money | June 3, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

So happy that the reasoning is that the DNC fat-cat Washington Insiders should have full votes.

THEN it says that the Voters should be counted HALF.

And who said the democratic party cared about the regular democrats.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 31, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse


Ausman says that only the Voters should be punished for the violations - the Superdelegates - the big party fat cats have to get off.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 31, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse


Not long ago Obama claimed that he'd visited 57 states and got a lot of ribbing from the press because the U.S. has 50 states in it, not 57. But even if Obama was tired from campaigning all day, and made a simple slip of the tongue, 57 is an odd number to confuse with 50. Now what Union has 57 states in it? The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organization with a permanent delegation to the United Nations. It has 57 Islamic member states, from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, Balkan, Southeast Asia, South Asia and South America.


Obama's father is identified as Arabic in his birth records, not "African negro". That's because his father's Luo tribe has a lot of Arabic blood in it and Obama's father was supposedly more than 50% Arab by Luo tribal heritage lines. According to his Kenyan records, Obama's father was 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab. So Obama's actually, technically, Arab-American with a minority amount of African Negro racial heritage. He is mainly of whatever his mother was, and then after that he's mostly Arabic and then after that African negro by a small amount.

Also, according to Muslim religious and cultural traditions, Obama's a Muslim because his father was Muslim and the religion in that culture is inherited from the father, like Jewish people inherit their heritage via the mother. So according to Muslim traditions, Obama is a Muslim who was born a Muslim but has avowed Christianity. There was even a NY Times article -- "Frank Talk About Obama and Islam" -- about that in March, suggesting that the Muslim world would hate Obama for being "apostate", which is punishable by death. But Muslim scholars apply the description "apostate" to an adult conversion from Islam to another religion. Since Obama was never raised in Islam, they would excuse his failure to practice as indoctrination by his culture from birth. So they would view him as a Muslim by birth raised away from his faith not as a matter of his choice. It does not appear that Obama is hated for not practicing Islam, since he's widely admired in Islamic societies who are rooting for him to win the election.

So if you want to know who Obama is ethnically, you don't need his records (that would just attest to what cultural definitions he chooses to go by). Technically, he's a mixture of Arabic and Caucasian with some black African thrown in. And according to Muslims he'd be a non-practicing Muslim born into another culture and raised outside the Islamic faith by his family's choice, not his.


It's hard to say what identity he ultimately identifies with, because his autobiography is admittedly "historical fiction" with "composite characters". He has surrounded himself with activist people who seem to identify with Arab Muslims, Africans, American Muslims and African Americans as a combined political/religious/social activist philosophy and lifestyle. For example, the Trinity Church newsletter had Hamas-supportive material in it and there seem to be close ties between American Nation of Islam leadership and Trinity Church Christian leadership. The Christianity at Trinity Church seems to be as racist, radical, militant and paranoid as any other religion that doesn't have "love thy neighbor" and "turn the other cheek" as precepts. Obama has been endorsed by both Nation of Islam and Hamas and has advocated a controversial and technically confused new diplomacy "doctrine" of talking with Iran without apparent agenda or preconditions, with the "doctrine" essentially comprised of just getting together for a rap session.

Posted by: AsperGirl | May 31, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

The greatest Rules Committee meeting in the history of America !!!


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 31, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Obama ran the most DISGUSTING campaign in modern history - all the while claiming he was above race - but his campaign doing just the opposite.

Tim Russert called him on it.

THAT MAKES OBAMA A FRAUD - That justifies a Convention vote for Hillary - the party needs to REVIEW the conduct of the Obama campaign and TAKE A VOTE at the Convention.

Ted Kennedy did it.

Michigan and Florida should count 100% - if Obama wants a revote there - schedule it.

Obama wants to PREVENT a revote

That is what makes Obama a THREAT TO DEMOCRACY - the states must be counted - Obama wants to take advantage of the situation and cause the states NOT TO COUNT AT ALL.

That is wrong.

It is a threat to democracy.

About par for the course for an affirmative action candidate.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 31, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company