O-MAN CONTINUES TO BEG FOR MONEY AS ROMNEY KEEPS RAKING IT IN
When candidate Obama talked of hope and change in 2008, who could have imagined that he would end up hoping for your change four years later? Yes, Obamabots, your leader is in dire financial straits – and he’s begging for anything you can give him – from $3.00 a pop for a chance at “Dinner with Barack” to the wedding or anniversary gifts you recently received. O needs cash – and he needs it now.
Brother, can you spare a dime?
Campaign donations are direct indicators of the intent of the donor, who can generally be put into one or more of three categories: Often, the donor simply buys into a candidate and his message. (O-man’s $3.00 a pop Kool-Aid drinkers, for example.) Most of the big bucks are provided by special interest groups with specific agendas which they believe will be championed by a particular candidate. (As has been the case with the O-man and Big Labor; AFL-CIO thug Richard Trumka being an excellent example.) And finally, during certain elections, donors single-mindedly focus on defeating the other guy and everything he stands for. (As is the case with Romney donors this go-around, who have contributed – and continue to contribute – in record amounts, for the sole purpose of defeating O and his socialist agenda.)
Ironically, private contributions proved to be so advantageous to the O-man in 2008 that he reneged on his pledge to John McCain to accept federal matching campaign funds. What a difference four years – and a failed presidency – make.
Now word comes that a desperate O-man is literally begging past donors for more money, as Mitt Romney continues to rake in the cash. Last week, a day after whining to supporters that he would be “the first president in modern history to be outspent” by his opponent unless donors upped their contributions, O pleaded with top donors for more money – during a conference call from Air Force One. Here’s the Beggar-in-Chief, according to a leaked transcript:
“I can’t do this by myself. I need you to meet or exceed what you did in 2008. Most of you maxed out my campaign last time. I really need you to do the same this time.”
Look to the union label
While much has been said (spun) by the Regime and its liberal media lapdogs about the high-minded people’s president foregoing evil corporate contributions, precious little has been said about the hypocrisy of the O-man’s reliance on massive contributions from Big Labor. In the run-up to the Democratic Convention, Team O looked to the union label big-time, as it tried (in vain) to get the unions to bankroll the event in Charlotte. Subsequently, DNC officials announced that Team O had missed its campaign contribution goal “deadline” (Team O has new contribution “deadlines” every 15 minutes.) by a whopping 60%. As a consequence, pre-convention events are being cancelled and/or scaled back. (Unsubstantiated reports indicate that Team O is now considering relocating the convention to an abandoned Stuckey’s off I-77.)
Pathetically, the Hypocrite-in-Chief even tried to persuade Bank of America execs to purchase expensive convention packages and luxury suites for the convention. (O’s acceptance speech will occur at Bank of America Stadium.) The hypocrisy, of course, is due to O’s penchant for incessantly skewering “Wall Street bankers.” Apparently, desperation has it price, hey O?
In addition to his hat-in-hand plea for more money, O also wallowed in self-pity during the Air Force One call:
“In 2008 everything was new and exciting about our campaign. And now I’m the incumbent president. I’ve got grey hair. People have seen disappointment because folks had a vision of change happening immediately. And it turns out change is hard.”
Um, O? Why do you suppose “folks had a vision of change happening immediately”? Ya think maybe the fact that you said you deserved to be a one-term president if you didn’t fulfill your hollow campaign promises in three years might have something to do with it? Or – maybe “folks” have tired of your continual class warfare rhetoric and gutless buck-passing? Hell, O – perhaps it’s just that a growing majority of Americans realize that your empty promise to “reach across the aisle” and “work with the other side” was nothing more than words.
Or maybe – just maybe – it’s because your supporters don’t think you can win, O. Think about it: not even liberals are fond of throwing (their own) good money after bad.
Change IS hard, O. Campaigning is a lot easier than governing, isn’t it? Too bad you never grasped the difference.
What’s next, O holding a “Will Work for Golf” sign on the street corner?