Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Mitt Romney is rebooting his campaign with a bold new attack against President Obama: The White House, he claims, is a hotbed of “crony capitalism” designed to pay off big-time Democratic donors. Government transparency groups say that if Romney wants to attack the president, he better put his anonymous money where his mouth is.
Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign donations, expressed shock and amazement that Romney would try to claim the high ground on rooting out undue influence from big donors. After all, Romney refuses to even name his top fundraisers, commonly called “bundlers,” in the first place. The information has been standard for presidents and presidential hopefuls in recent election cycles: Obama has named his bundlers, as did President George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).
“It’s ironic that Romney would criticize Obama for doing something while shielding his campaign from being similarly criticized,” Krumholz told TPM. “Romney’s house isn’t exactly shatter-proof.”
By coincidence, a coalition of campaign finance advocates, including the Center for Responsive Politics, launched a petition drive Monday to demand Romney follow past precedent and release his bundlers."
I understand the Romney camp's need to try to change the subject from his own finances, but attacking Obama for something you are attempting to keep secret in your own campaign? Seriously, who is running Romney's campaign, and how much are they being paid by the Democrats?
"Mitt Romney is rebooting his campaign with a bold new attack against President Obama: The White House, he claims, is a hotbed of “crony capitalism” designed to pay off big-time Democratic donors. Government transparency groups say that if Romney wants to attack the president, he better put his anonymous money where his mouth is.
Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign donations, expressed shock and amazement that Romney would try to claim the high ground on rooting out undue influence from big donors. After all, Romney refuses to even name his top fundraisers, commonly called “bundlers,” in the first place. The information has been standard for presidents and presidential hopefuls in recent election cycles: Obama has named his bundlers, as did President George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).
“It’s ironic that Romney would criticize Obama for doing something while shielding his campaign from being similarly criticized,” Krumholz told TPM. “Romney’s house isn’t exactly shatter-proof.”
By coincidence, a coalition of campaign finance advocates, including the Center for Responsive Politics, launched a petition drive Monday to demand Romney follow past precedent and release his bundlers."
I understand the Romney camp's need to try to change the subject from his own finances, but attacking Obama for something you are attempting to keep secret in your own campaign? Seriously, who is running Romney's campaign, and how much are they being paid by the Democrats?
Yikes you need to do a lot more than this to fight off these serious charges. Claiming Romney could do the same thing is silly in the extreme. They need to try something else.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
