Did Kerry Lie Today About Contributions? Looks Like It to Me.

[Skip Intro]

Kerry supporters, please explain. If I'm wrong, I'll be more than happy to to apologize.

Here's what Kerry said today:

In Kansas City, Missouri, Kerry said, "The only people that have contributed to my campaigns to the U.S. Senate are individual Americans. Now are some of those individual Americans lobbyists? Yeah, sure. And if anybody in America thinks that a $1,000 contribution against 14 million in a campaign is somehow going to sway my vote they're, there's a level of cynicism about this."

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=425...

---------

And here's a breakdown of his contributors for the 2004 election cycle:

JOHN KERRY (D)
Top Contributors
Cycle: 2004

Skadden, Arps et al
$97,650

Citigroup Inc
$70,200

Piper Rudnick
$68,250

Mintz, Levin et al
$63,300

Goldman Sachs
$62,500

Robins, Kaplan et al
$62,250

Hill, Holliday et al
$50,750

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance
$50,250

Harvard University
$47,750

Morgan Stanley
$39,500

Clifford Law Offices
$36,000

Bain Capital
$35,500

International Profit Assn
$34,250

Holland & Knight
$32,950

Akin, Gump et al
$32,550

FleetBoston Financial
$32,000

UBS Americas
$31,550

Hale & Dorr
$30,200

Sullivan & Cromwell
$30,050

News Corp
$29,400

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/contrib.asp?ID=N00000245&Cycle=2004
--------

Could some Kerry supporter please explain the discrepancy in Kerry's words today, and the facts?

[NV1962]

1. Sigh...

Earlier, on another thread, I asked if it was true that Kerry got just under $70,000 from News Corp.

The (indirect) answer I got was no, because the site where I got that number incorrectly added individual (employee) contributions into an (aggregate) "corporate" tally.

Now I'm seeing that still News Corp appears, with $29,400 donated...

Sadly disappointed here, in Kerry not returning Faux News' money.

[dsc]

2. That is who they work for

not who gave the money. For this analysis to be effective one would have to figure out the level of the employees involved and what if any involvement the company had in generating the contributions.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

7. Thanks

[David Dunham]

3. These Are Total Contributions From Individual Employees of These Companies

These are not company or firm contributions. I know, since I am now working at Skadden, Arps. People at this firm also gave big bucks to Dean and Clark, too.

[Skip Intro]

8. ok, seems strange, but that's an explanation I guess

Seems really strange someone would keep track of who individual contributors are employed by.

I was employed by Verizon for a while, no one ever asked me if I donated money to a candidate, and which candidate. If they had, I'd have told them to screw themselves.

Just saying, maybe you're right, but it seems strange to me.

[xray s]

10. Every time I have donated to a campaign they asked for employer info

It's the law.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Eloriel]

14. Thanks for the reminder of Kerry's infamous "get over it"

remark. I'd almost forgotten it.

And no, we haven't lost. Not even close. Not with multiple thousands turning out in support of Dean when he appears.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

5. Others have explained your error better than I.

[xray s]

6. This explains it

From the opensecrets link

HOW TO READ THIS CHART: This chart lists the top donors to this candidate during the 2004 election cycle.The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

[NV1962]

11. Ah - thanks.

That's reassuring.

Obviously I overlooked the obvious part (highlighted in red and bold too on OpenSecrets...) *blush*

[papau]

9. Pacs versus individual contributions - Kerry takes no PAC money, the

list above is just a summation by place of employment of individual contributors -

rather poorly presented in this post - or spun - so as to look as if it was contributions from corporations

At open secrets they say up front "The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families."
-and since we know there is no PAC money we are left with

"individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families"

so it sounds like Kerry is telling the truth, doesn't it?

:-)

[Skip Intro]

12. Well, maybe

It was an honest question.

[xray s]

13. OK O'Reilly! APOLOGIZE!

:) :) :) :)

[Skip Intro]

15. Oh don't compare me to that moron, please. I'm a man of my word.

I had thses numbers staring me in the face, and had just read Kerry's words on the matter (which I still don't believe to be accurate - all that time in DC an no $$$ other than from individuals???), and it looked like black and white. I still find the list of corporations and the dollar amounts suspicious. I wish they'd list the amounts of the individual contributions, instead of listing them lumped together like that. Newscorp?!

But yes, it does appear I was wrong to cite this info as proof. My mistake, I apolgize.

(O'reilly?!)

[xray s]

16. Just having some fun!

Your apology proves you have more class in the outer edge of your little toe nail than O'Reilly has in his entire body.

:)

[The Traveler]

17. It is a valid question

The line "But these were individuals who happened to work for lobbying firms making contributions" is a weak defence and assumes we don't know that the system is manipulated by those whose profession is to know how.

I stand for Clark, who was a lobbyist himself for a brief period of time but is honest about it. I will stand for Dean the instant Clark drops out, if Clark does. I will vote for Kerry if he wins the nomination but will take a long shower afterwards.

The more I study Kerry's record, the less convinced I am of his status as a man of principle, or even a coherent philosophy. Still ... anybody but Bush is a good mantra.

[AngryWhiteLiberal]

18. NEWSCORP!!!! Isn't that Murdock's Co. (a la Faux)??

If this is true, then Kerry is a fixer for any power shift in Washington. The faces and parties change, but deep down they're all the same. SICKENING. Talk about disinfranchised voters. Sheesh.

JB

[sandnsea]

19. Dean $11,000 News Corp

Dean is a fixer too I guess. Sickening.

[The Traveler]

20. Kinda sickening, yes

It is sickening how the system works. But I don't think there is a pattern of systematic contribution to the Dean campaign by the employees of lobbying firms. It is not that lobbyists contribute to candidates that is perturbing ... it is when patterns emerge and when the amount of the contributions becomes significant.

Having said that, I am must also say I am unconvinced that this <i>necessarily</i> tarnishes Kerry in and of itself. It does raise a red flag, however, and there are other things about Kerry that concern me. Other red flags.

But this is just my humble opinion. The primary season is the time during which we get to air these differences. I don't like Kerry ... but I <i>will</i> vote for him if that's the way this workds out.