Cheat-Seeking Missles

Thursday, February 08, 2007

The Bundlers Behind The Candidates

To be president, you've got to be well bundled. WaPo explains:
SEN. HILLARY Rodham Clinton had a party at her house the other night for an elite group: about 70 fundraisers who agreed to raise at least $250,000 -- and some as much as $1 million -- for her presidential campaign. That soiree and a meeting for lower-level fundraisers ($25,000 and up) prompts us to raise again the question that we couldn't get the Clinton campaign to answer the other day. What are the candidate's plans to release the names of her big bundlers?
President Bush disclosed his 2004 bundlers, as did the major Dem rivals. McCain and Obama have pledged to disclose their 2008 bundlers, setting a standard the voters will appreciate.

That Hil won't disclose is no surprise. She's been a wonder of nondisclosure ever since her Whitewater, pig futures and Rose Law Firm days. Also no surprise is John Edwards' refusal to respond to WaPo's inquiry about his disclosure intentions. Why would the self-proclaimed populist hero -- how exactly can you self-proclaim that? -- want to hand out the names of the obnoxious, self-centered, unethical, insanely rich trial lawyers who have assumed their efforts to elect their hero would be anonymous?

Also not yet pledging to disclose their bundlers yet are Giuliani and Romney.

The most interesting thing about this editorial is the prominence given to the Dem candidates. It could have been used as a club on two GOP frontrunners, but instead led prominently with bad Hil and Big Mansion Boy and good Barack, relegating Giuliani and Romney to the lower realms of the story and a rather non-accusatory "did not respond to our comments."

Could it be that the editorial board at WaPo has selected its candidate for 2008?

hat-tip: Real Clear Politics
Related Tags: , , , ,