July 22, 2010 04:58 PM UTC

Is Bennet Calling Obama a Liar Too?

•  
• by: oldbenkenobi

Obama sent out an email yesterday on behalf of Organizing for America that said in part:

Organizing for America counts entirely on supporters like you to fight back — no special interests, no corporate PACs. To keep making change and to defend the change we have already won, we need you — and at least 104 other people in Denver — to contribute so we have the resources necessary going into the election. [my emphasis]

Interesting.  Made me wonder if Obama ever accepted PAC money. Yes he did (Chris Cillizza, Wash Post).  Made me wonder if Obama ever had his own PAC.  Yes he did, and in fact he was disbursing funds from it during the Presidential campaign (John Solomon, Wash Post).

Now, just two days ago, Michael Bennet put out an ad attacking Romanoff because Romanoff once took PAC money.  Of course, the ad Bennet approved implies Romanoff is still taking PAC money.  He is not.  And the ad implies Romanoff lied in his own ad when he said, “I don’t take a dime of their money.”  He was telling the truth.  “Now we know the truth,” the ad says.  Not by watching that ad, we don’t.  Susan Daggett is disappointed in all the negativity.  Is she disappointed her husband’s ad is intentionally deceptive?

Bennet’s ad says of Romanoff, “He’s even run his own PAC while campaigning for Senate.”  I don’t know the truth of this statement, it is worded strangely.  But if true it is exactly what Obama did while he was running for President.  

So what we have here is a fundraising letter from OFA that trumpets that it does not take PAC money. Is OFA going to then turn around and donate that money to Bennet, who does take PAC money? OFA has already helped the Bennet campaign in various ways.  It seems likely it will help the Bennet campaign again.

And will Bennet be launching the same attack against Barack Obama that he used against Romanoff?  Obama and Romanoff have done exactly the same thing.  It bears repeating, Bennet is attacking Romanoff for doing exactly what Bennet’s Great Benefactor did.

Here’s a quote from another PAC-related article (Scott Helman, Boston Globe):

Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that after seeing the influence of lobbyists firsthand during his two years in Washington, Obama decided before he entered the presidential race that he would take a different approach to fund-raising than he had in the past.

“He’s leading by example and taking steps that he feels need to be taken on the national stage to clean up the undue influence of Washington lobbyists on the policies and priorities of Washington,” Psaki said.

Obama also says in that article, “The reason that I’m running for president is because of you, not because of folks who are writing big checks, and that’s a clear message that has to be sent, I think, by every candidate.”  That’s not the message Bennet is sending.  

From the Cillizza article:

“Taking these steps is going to make fundraising more difficult and our campaign more dependent on the grassroots,” said Obama spokesman Dan Pfeiffer. “But Senator Obama felt it was important to demonstrate that he is serious about changing the way Washington does business.”

I applaud Obama for his decision not to accept PAC money.  And I applaud Romanoff too.  We need a leader in the Senate who recognizes the biggest problems facing the country and then takes action to correct them, even — especially — if it means changing his mind and making his Senate campaign more difficult.  Here in Colorado, Romanoff took action against Colorado’s biggest problem, TABOR.  We don’t have to wait and see if he lives up to his potential, he has already been tested by fire and we have seen him lead.  

Bennet should not have been appointed: Ritter’s Gamble

He’s run a lousy campaign: Bennet’s Cliche Cavalcade

Romanoff is the proven leader: Leadership, Romanoff v. Bennet