Obama Inc.?
Any doubts that Barack Obama is not seriously considering a presidential run (on 2008 or later) should now be put to rest. The guy apparently already has a War Room to retaliate against negative publicity.
Investigative reporter Ken Silverstein has a piece (in hard copy only) in the November issue of Harper's detailing some of Obama's less-trumpeted corporate ties. And no sooner did the piece see light than Obama's office issued a detailed, fine-pointed rebuttal. That's pretty quick footwork for your run-of-the-mill Senator whose immediate priority would be electing some other congressional Dems instead of fending off criticism from an elite magazine.
Silverstein links to Obama's objections on Harper's online blog. Silverstein, who has a great track record as a dirt-digger, says he had a long conversation with one of Barack's staffers in which the Senator's objections were "graciously but firmly" stated. But Silverstein is not deterred:
The staffer—and some readers—took issue with my statement that Obama had “established a political machine funded and run by a standard Beltway group of lobbyists, P.R. consultants, and hangers-on.†But if you examine Obama's campaign finance records carefully, it's hard to reach any other conclusion. Here are some additional details that were not included in the article.
Since announcing his candidacy for the Illinois Senate seat, Obama has raised the astonishing sum of nearly $21 million and has built close relationships with a number of traditional fat-cat donors. For example, one of Obama's leading career patrons is Skadden, Arps ($53,271, according to the most recent disclosure filings), a leading corporate law firm and one of the biggest donors to the Democratic Party.
Several of the firm’s lawyers donated money to Obama and also helped raise money for him as well. That includes Christina Tchen, a corporate litigator at Skadden who has represented major financial firms in consumer class-action suits. (Tchen is on the board of trustees of the University of Chicago Hospitals, where Obama’s wife, Michelle, is vice president for community and external affairs.)
In November of last year, three other Skadden attorneys helped organize a fundraiser for Obama's Leadership PAC, the vehicle he uses to support other Democratic candidates, and to boost his own political profile and gain support within the party. They were: Vivenne LaBorde, a former aide to Congressman Chaka Fattah and a senior attorney in the firm’s Mergers & Acquisitions department; Toni Cook Bush, a former senior counsel to the communications subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee and now a representative for cable, satellite and telephone companies; and Vaughn Williams, whose practice “emphasizes securities and corporate litigation, including class action litigation,†according to the firm’s website.
Others who have helped raise funds for Obama's Leadership PAC include John Gorman of Texas-based Tejas Securities, a major funder of Senate Democrats (and of the Bush presidential campaigns) and Winston & Strawn, the Chicago-based law and lobbying firm. Individual contributors to Obama include some of the best-connected lobbyists in town, including Jeffrey Peck (whose clients include MasterCard, the Business Roundtable, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) and Rich Tarplin (Chevron, the American Petroleum Institute, and the National Association of Manufacturers).
Silverstein continues by saying that these ties have not necessarily rendered Obama a simple mouthpiece of his corporate donors. On the other hand, the rising Senator has gone to bat for the Fat Cats more often than some of his more enthusiastic boosters might like to admit.
I'm doing my own research into Obama at the moment and have not yet reached definitive conclusions about him. He's certainly an attractive public figure who in many way departs from the usual Hill mold. But Silverstein's compelling, persuasive reporting raises some pretty serious questions.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:21 am
American democracy requires money machines? I’m … shocked. Why can’t Obama run for Prez like Jerry Brown, crashing on the couches of Iowa supporters, or like (whoa, nostalgia-rush) Barry Commoner, who would take time out from his own campaign to go down to the discount corner store to buy his own socks? “Yep, I’m meeting a fine class of people down here at the Greyhound bus station on my way to the next city, real salt of the earth types … unfortunately, it seems that none of them can remember ever having voted ….”
Time will tell whether Obama’s apparent presidential ambitions are real or just more “tree-shaking” not “jelly-making” for the party (as Jesse used to put it.) Is he the New Bill Clinton? Well, no: he’s not enough of a political prodigy for that. Clinton was much further along at age 35 than Obama is at age 45.
I like the guy. Lots of people do. What’s not to like? He even, by some weird personal resonance, seems to have some Red State appeal. As Hillary’s veep, I can see it (she who enjoys surprisingy high marks from Red State women). And if Hillary went two terms, while letting Obama be almost as much of a vice president as Bush has let Cheney be, nobody would say of him “unseasoned, too young” in 2016. Especially if Old Bill is toddling into his office a couple times a week to coach him. Obama-prepping would give Bill something to do, after all, while keeping his profile low.
(”2016″? What the hell do I think I’m talking about? If six weeks is a lifetime in politics, 10 years is a millenium. My crystal ball cloudeth over ….)
October 31st, 2006 at 6:57 am
He voted for The Fence. That doesn’t tell me _all_ I need to know, of course, but that vote does make him more Clintonesque than I would like.
October 31st, 2006 at 7:56 am
The Harper’s piece is definitely a must-read. Obama, by my own conclusion, is no different from any Midwestern Democrat, except his style is more “charismatic” in the American sense. He represents everything wrong with gullible liberals who vote Democrat - he is at the “left” wing of the party, yet he is quite corrupt but admits to Silverstie his own corruption, which he doesn’t consider corruption.
He is a phony Gephardt type who happens to have someting different…
October 31st, 2006 at 8:59 am
Barack’s calculation is that he needs to be accountable to the Washington crowd first. An occasional conciliatory nod to the roots, by this calculation, should be enough. Unfortunately for him, he’s learning the ropes during a period of transition where the power is moving away from the traditional base. His alliance with Joe Lieberman is a case in point. If this is where he thinks he can best build up his stature within the party, he’s sorely mistaken. This is the losing side of the divide.
October 31st, 2006 at 11:25 am
I look forward to a new batch of commercials with blonde bimbos saying, “Call Me Barack!”
Miscegenation Nation!
October 31st, 2006 at 11:45 am
My crystal ball cloudeth over ….but wait. I see President Obama, meeting with the majority leader of the Senate, Ox-eyed Hillary, Vice-President Janet Napolitano, Atty. Gen. John Edwards of winged words, Sec. of State Joseph Biden (of the might battle cry) and …oh, forget it. Now it says, “Try Again”
October 31st, 2006 at 12:02 pm
jcummings: could you please clarify, “phony Gephardt” Are you saying Obama is not authentic in a sense that Gephardt was? Or are you suggesting that Obama is just another Gephardt and that he too, is not - for lack of a better word - authentic?
October 31st, 2006 at 12:54 pm
Just another Gephardt - authentic, yes, as a midwestern establishmentarian with some emotional links to “the people.” Authenticity is not what I’m driving at…Obama rates above many Dems. Its just that he is not who his supporters pretend he is….and if they have “no illusions” then they may as well go and support Lieberman.
October 31st, 2006 at 4:38 pm
I am one of those who think that Obama may very likely be on the ticket as the Veep since I doubt he has the experience yet to be the big enchelada and, frankly, we’ll be looking for someone who doesn’t need a lot of OJT after the example of the current occupant.
But I’ve got to say that I really, really don’t think we have to wait for Marc to make up his mind about the Jr Sen from Illinois. Its going to be thumbs down. Just as Marc was less than thrilled with the prospect of Mark Warner. Just as he obviously has no use for Hillary and just as he disdains Al Gore. In short there is no potential Democratic Candidate for President that will meet his high standards for the office.
Why? Well they’re Democrats don’t you see!
October 31st, 2006 at 4:41 pm
And as far as his fundraising that is the way you have to do it. Sorry but that is a fact. If you want to know the real scandal its his hoarding that dough when the potential exists for a party blow-out in a week. All that is needed is more money in the last few days. If Obama realy is serious then he’ll spread some of the wealth arouind to needy candidates in suddenly competative races.
Otherwise there will be long memories.
October 31st, 2006 at 4:43 pm
rlc - don’t even bother with this shit.
October 31st, 2006 at 6:36 pm
I’m assuming that I was the only one to catch tObama at the African-American history museum at USC. I also rolled over to campus with my theater major cuz to watch him out Hollywood Ben Afflect (who was brimming with the kind of giddiness I had not seen since the 5th grade) and obliterate Angelitis.
I have to laugh when JCummings says Barack has “some emotional” links “to the people”. Just ask the average black person what they think of him. There is an excitement mixed with a fear that the word palpable can’t even describe, watershed would be more accurate. What he neglects to factor, purposely or not so purposely by avoiding the topic of race, is the power of symbolism. The absolute dream factor involved for many who feel outside of the system. They can relate to dirty hands or not. He is immigrant, black, white, good looking and a success. It’s a win for Liberals it’s a win for Conservatives.
Obama definitely has IT. He’s a star, like Clinton and Reagan, but his star power to use a well-worn analogy is more Kennedyesque. The crowd at USC was diverse and he handled them like pros. Lots of chicks were there (the crowd seemed to be under a G) - housewives, working gals who skipped work, students. A surprising amount of young white men (damn that Hip-Hop). Asians, Latinos and African-Americans all wondering if they were witnessing history. Even at the counter rally held by the campus Republicans they were sweating to get a piece of him. As opposed to Condi, Obama gets a pass in the black community - a ghetto pass.
Now that I’m done waxing poetic, whether he has the hard goods is another thing. He’s been pretty cautious in his votes and he needs to definitely beef up on the foreign policy. He already has Jessie beat in that he was elected to office. The Washington Post asserted that he could be pulling a Colin, flirting with us, acting like a tease to make the NYT list. In his book he’s candid about his past partying, which is smart because as we move past the Boomers it will become near impossible to find a candidate who hasn’t at least tried a drug.
I doubt if he steps into the ring in ‘08 he’ll be going for the gusto, but more like positioning himself. I can’t wait to read what Marc digs up. I know some are looking for Jesus, but for black folks Moses will do.
October 31st, 2006 at 7:14 pm
“the rising Senator has gone to bat for the Fat Cats”
LOL! Wtf? When did you join A.N.S.W.E.R.? Christ, when you and Comrade Cummings start sounding alike, I know not to take you seriously. Good luck finding the unsullied candidate of your dreams–hey, what’s Nader up to? Or wait, maybe just start a new party: The Purity Party! Membership prerequisite: no “fat cat” paper trail, and the purity of a Stalinist! Current membership: zero!
On second thought, maybe we can stick Paul Wellstone on the ballot. Sure, he’s still probably a Democrat, but I know for a fact he’s not raising any money! 99 and 44/100% pure!
November 1st, 2006 at 5:38 am
Just as a rising star begins to shine by learning how to talk-middle politics, an old left lib screws up a joke, and a possible tight election, by refusing to appologize to our troops for an unintended insult.
John, the gift that keeps on giving. Would you consider bringing your wife along next time John for a possible double header?
November 1st, 2006 at 8:00 am
So its purist to not want a “populist” progressive Dem, or so he claims to be, to not take money from high-finance? OK. Thats why I know that Dems are a bunch of hypocrites. The sad think is Barack thinks that he’s not being used. I really admire the guy, propbably tthink he’s one of the better American politicians. But he’s a tool of capital like everyone else - and far worse than say, Bernie Sanders, who takes no finance/corporate dough.
November 1st, 2006 at 10:39 am
I’m going to let you all in on a little secret. If this elections goes as well for the Dems as all the polls suggest the 2008 Preidential Nomination will be very valuable. And watch a certain former Senator and Vice President from TN decide to run.
November 1st, 2006 at 10:48 am
Then it will be a windfall for Occidental Petroleum, drilling in Columbia and killing union leaders.
November 1st, 2006 at 1:42 pm
I just now happend to notice that Obama has a weekly podcast, and that it’s number 10 among the top 100 most popular podcasts at iTunes, with only a few like This American Life, Comedy Central and Ricky Gervais ahead of it.
Dude ain’t dumb.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/
November 1st, 2006 at 4:15 pm
Senator Obama’s Office Responds to Misleading Harper’s Magazine Story
Monday, October 23, 2006
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Tommy Vietor (202) 997-3462
The latest issue of Harper’s Magazine contains a piece titled “BARACK OBAMA INC. The birth of a Washington machine.” The story is unfortunately filled with a selective presentation of the facts, innuendo and a cynical assumption of bad faith in our leaders.
While we do not doubt the integrity or the intelligence of the piece’s author, Ken Silverstein, we feel that our side of the story was not fairly presented. Below are some misleading passages from the piece, and some facts we believe will help tell the full story.
Misleading Claim #1: Iraq
Harper’s Magazine says Obama has changed his rhetoric on Iraq. Silverstein wrote, “The calibration of Obama’s own political rhetoric has been particularly evident in regard to the war in Iraq…Since taking office, Obama has become far more measured in his position.” [page 38]
Fact:
Obama has been consistent. He opposed the war from the start, but decided that once we were in Iraq, we needed to plan our withdrawal carefully. Frank Rich of the New York Times puts it succinctly: “On one true test for his party, Iraq, (Obama) was consistent from the start. On the long trail to a hotly competitive senatorial primary in Illinois, he repeatedly questioned the rationale for the war before it began. . . .. He judged Saddam to pose no immediate threat to America and argued for containment over a war . . . . He hasn’t changed. In his new book, he gives a specific date (the end of this year) for beginning ”a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops. . . ”’ [New York Times 10/23/2006].
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #2: - Favors to the Nuclear Industry
Harper’s Magazine implies that Obama voted to protect loan guarantees for energy technology on behalf of the nuclear industry. [page 37].
Fact:
Obama voted with 75 other Senators to promote a wide array of innovative energy technologies. The Sununu amendment in question would have eliminated loan guarantees to encourage emerging clean-energy technologies. These guarantees encouraged a wide array of renewable fuel. Besides nuclear energy, the guarantees can be used for solar and wind power, hybrid cars, hydrogen fuel cells, carbon sequestration, coal gasification and other technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Obama voted against the Sununu amendment because he supports emerging technologies and believes many companies would not pursue advanced research without financial support. In the end, 76 senators opposed the amendment.
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #3: Support for Other Democrats
Harper’s Magazine says Obama only gives funds to moderate, establishment Democrats, failing to note that Obama has donated to every Senate Democrat running for office in 2006. Harper’s says “Obama’s PAC has given to candidates that have been carefully culled and selected by the Democratic establishment on the basis of their marketability as palatable ‘moderates’-even when they are facing more progressive and equally viable challengers.” Harper’s cites as examples Obama’s political donations to Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont, and Tammy Duckworth over Christine Cegelis. [page 37]
Fact:
Obama donated to every Democratic Senator running for reelection and then contributed to Ned Lamont after he won the primary. Harper’s takes exception to Obama’s decision to donate money to Senator Lieberman, but fails to note that Obama endorsed Ned Lamont and gave him $5,000 the day after Lamont won the nomination. Obama also donated money to every Senate Democrat up for reelection and to every Democratic challenger in a closely contested Senate race, including Sherrod Brown, Claire McCaskill, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Amy Klobuchar. Harper’s also fails to note that in the most recent polls, Tammy Duckworth is defeating her GOP opponent, while Christine Cegelis only garnered 43 percent of the vote in 2004, a year when Alan Keyes was at the top of the Republican ticket in Illinois. John Kerry received 47 percent of the vote in that district.
Harper’s Magazine misrepresents Tammy Duckworth’s position on Iraq. Harper’s also implies that Duckworth is a pro-war candidate, noting “When asked about her stand on the Iraq war by a reporter, Duckworth had replied, ‘There is good and bad in everything.’” [page 37-38] Duckworth, an Iraq war veteran, says on her website “invading Iraq was a mistake.”
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #4: Ethanol
Harper’s Magazine implies that Obama has supported ethanol production because the country’s largest ethanol producer, ADM is based in Illinois. Harper’s also argues that from a conservation standpoint it is potentially better to drive a standard gasoline car than a flex-fuel vehicle. [page 32].
Fact:
Senator Obama supports ethanol production because it is a clean, efficient, and domestically produced alternative to oil from the Middle East. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, E85 fuel produces fewer total toxins and lower levels of ozone-forming volatile organic compounds compared to gasoline. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has determined that ethanol production is efficient, creating 1.67 times the energy it takes to produce it. Argonne National Laboratory reports that by switching to ethanol and biomass fuels in our passenger cars and light-duty trucks, drivers can potentially reduce the use of petroleum by at least 68 percent. Blending ethanol with gasoline just at a 10 percent level will translate to savings to consumers of $3.3 billion a year according to independent researchers at LECG (based on 2002 prices).
[Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4]
Senator Obama wants to enable more entrepreneurs and small businesses to develop ethanol. Senator Obama supports a renewable fuels standard that would encourage ethanol production by expanding demand for renewable fuels and further diversifying the ethanol industry, thereby ensuring much greater competition in the U.S. liquid fuels market in the future.
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #5: Democratic Convention Speech
Harper’s Magazine suggests that Senator Obama was chosen to speak at the Democratic National Convention only after he had received the blessing of Washington lobbyists and fundraisers. “If the speech was his debut to the wider American public, he had already undergone an equally successful but much quieter audition with Democratic Party leaders and fund-raisers, without whose support he would surely never have had been chosen for such a prominent role at the convention.” [page 36]
Fact:
The decision to choose Senator Obama was made by Senator John Kerry’s campaign, not by lobbyists. After Obama’s selection as the keynote speaker at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Senator Kerry’s aides were very clear about their rationale. According to the Chicago Tribune: “For the Kerry campaign, the choice of Obama has great meaning as officials try to dispel criticism that they have done a poor job of reaching out to African-American voters. Kerry began to focus on Obama, the Democratic candidate for Senate in Illinois, for a role at the convention after meeting him for the first time and listening to him speak at a gala fundraiser in Chicago in April. The next day, Kerry and Obama toured the Greater West Town Community Development Project, visited a bakery, and held a town hall meeting together. An aide to Kerry said the Massachusetts senator was struck by Obama’s ‘passion, eloquence and charisma.’ [Chicago Tribune, July 15, 2004]
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #6: Private Jets
Harper’s Magazine wrongly says that Obama stopped taking privately subsidized air travel because of bad press. “[A]fter some atypically bad press for accepting flight, Obama imposed a ban at his office on privately subsidized travel.” [page 40, footnote]
Fact:
Obama voluntarily chose to reimburse the full fare for private flights - not just the first-class fare as Senate rules require - because he felt it was right. Obama voluntarily chose to reimburse full fare on private flights despite less stringent Senate rules because he thought it was the right thing to do. Obama’s decision actually garnered Obama favorable press coverage. “Senator Barack Obama flew at least nine times on corporate jets last year…each time, he reimbursed the plane’s owners at first-class rates, as Senate rules require. But Mr. Obama, freshman Democrat from Illinois, felt queasy about this perk of Senate life, so he said he gave it up. ‘This is an example where appearances matter,’ he said.” [New York Times, March 8, 2006]
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #7: Organized Labor
Harper’s Magazine suggests that Obama’s hiring of a former staffer for Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin makes him susceptible to policies that hurt organized labor. Harper’s writes, “[Obama] hired Karen Kornbluh, a senior aide to Robert Rubin when the latter, as head of the Treasury Department under Bill Clinton, was a chief advocate for NAFTA and other free-trade policies that decimated the nation’s manufacturing sector”. [page 33]
Fact:
Obama has a strong pro-labor voting record. Obama voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement and has said that NAFTA should be renegotiated. Obama has cosponsored many important bills to help workers, including: an increase in the minimum wage, and the Employee Free Choice Act. He also championed efforts in the Senate to help air traffic controllers engaged in a labor dispute with the Federal Aviation Administration
——————————————————————————–
Misleading Claim #8: Calling to Action
Harper’s Magazine criticizes Obama for calling on students only to strive for energy independence during a speech in July. “Obama’s speech contained just a single call for political action. This was when he had introduced Mark Pike, a law student who then came bounding across the state in a green one-piece mechanic’s outfit. As part of a campaign called ‘Kick the Oil Habit,’ Pike was to depart directly from the conference and drive from Washington to Los Angeles in a ‘flex-fuel’ vehicle. ‘Give it up for Mark!’ Obama had urged the crowd, noting that Pike would be refueling only at gas stations that offer E85-which Obama touts as ‘a clean, renewable, and domestically produced alternative fuel.’” [page 32]
Fact:
Obama was specifically asked to touch on only two themes in his speech. The group that organized the event - the Center for American Progress - specifically asked Obama to touch on two themes in his speech, 1) what inspired him to go into politics, and 2) briefly the importance of energy independence.
——————————————————————————–
If Harper’s was interested in hearing about other issues, below are speeches by Senator Obama on a range of subjects, which are all available on his U.S. Senate website:
Commencement Call to Service Speech
Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Non-Proliferation and Russia: The Challenges Ahead
Hurricane Katrina and Energy Security
National Security: Energy Security is National Security
Climate Change: Energy Independence and the Safety of Our Planet
Education Teaching Our Kids in a 21st Century Economy
Sex/Violence in Media
Moving Forward in Iraq
Lobbying Reform
November 1st, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Don’t know about all the claims in HARPER’S but if one is that Obama supports Ethanol from corn I’m shocked, shocked to discover that a Midwest farm state Senator might actually support measure that would increase the value of the crops grown in his state! I believe that is what is called representing the interests on one’s constituents. How dare he!
(BTW Tom Harkin also supports Ethanol from corn - sellout!)
November 2nd, 2006 at 2:22 am
I have been suspicious of the media-generated rise of Barack Obama. Yet I was disappointed by the Harpers piece. Expecting big revalations, it just revealed that he supports ethanol and receives money from lobbyists and financiers. No big surprise there. And Obama’s response to the article, posted above, was a good one. But no matter, we should look beyond the fawning of him by Democrat true believers and show that he is not the savior he is made out to be.
November 3rd, 2006 at 8:13 pm
[...] Permalink| [...]
December 8th, 2006 at 1:19 am
replica coach handbag
[url=http://replica-coachhandbag.blogspot.com]replica coach handbag[/url]
January 23rd, 2007 at 12:20 am
March 26th, 2007 at 7:15 am
i belive obama can become president one day.
March 26th, 2007 at 7:17 am
barack is better off being who he wants to be as a president maybe one day he can become a president of the us but i am a little worried about it theres just somthing i dont like about him.
May 4th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
available destroying intrusive protection spyware while…
I do not 100% agree with you but i have your site bookmarked anyway because i want to learn more about other people and thier view on this
Greets…
June 29th, 2007 at 8:07 am
Braeden…
Hey, look under the hood!ItÂ’s a bird!ItÂ’s a plane!ItÂ’s SUPERCHIP!With…
March 15th, 2008 at 1:54 am
boost free mobile phone ringtones…
Find free nokia tracfone ringtones keypress motorola ringtones v170…
April 17th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Blog Hopper…
Hi There. I’m blog hopping….
May 10th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Orthopedic Wrist Braces…
I found your site on technorati and read a few of your other posts. Keep up the good work. I just added your RSS feed to my Google News Reader. Looking forward to reading more from you….
May 29th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
red seven black jack…
Before keno inlinea winning at black jack casino on line gambling casino games pro play casino…
June 10th, 2008 at 10:36 am
tornei di poker on line…
Con win video poker online casino gambling site strip poker flash play keno online telecharger jeu poker gratuites…
June 30th, 2008 at 7:52 am
software poker gratis…
Officially play free black jack casino pc games slot machine online spielen casino online slots mindest einsatz…