FACT CHECK: OBAMA AND OIL

[Hope And Change]

FACT CHECK: OBAMA AND OIL


Posted: Friday, March 28, 2008 7:14 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC/NJ’s Aswini Anburajan

GREENBURG, Pa. -- The Clinton campaign today accused the Obama campaign of "false advertising," claiming that a recent ad Obama released in Pennsylvania was disngenous because Obama has been the recipient of more than $200,000 from the oil and gas industry.

In the ad, Obama says, "I'm Barack Obama, and I don't take money from oil companies or lobbyists, and I won't let them block change any more."

Obama has taken $213,884 from the oil and gas industry as of Feb. 29th, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Sen. Hillary Clinton has taken $306,813 in that same period.

Two of Obama's campaign bundlers are also CEOs for oil and gas companies, per a list released on his campaign Web site.

Robert Cavnar, listed as a bundler who has raised between $50,000 to $100,000 for the campaign, is the chairman and CEO of Mission Resources Corp., a Houston-based firm. George Kaiser, also listed in the same $50,000 to $100,000 category, is the CEO of Tulsa-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Company.

"It's unfortunate that Senator Obama is using false advertising to explain why he can be trusted to do something about energy prices," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said. "Senator Obama says he doesn't take campaign contributions from oil companies but the reality is that Exxon, Shell, and others are among his donors."

Obama routinely criticizes companies like Exxon-Mobil on the stump, but over the course of his presidential campaign he has taken more than $30,000 from individuals working for Exxon-Mobil. Clinton has taken more than $20,000 from Exxon-Mobil in the same period.

Just last month, Obama took more than $11,000 from individuals at Exxon-Mobil, per the center. At least 12 of those contributions came from individuals who contributed $250 each, the lowest listed donation. In that same period, Clinton took more than $3,000 from individuals working at Exxon-Mobil.

However, many of those contributions appear to come from workers at the firm not just executives. For example, Patrice McGowan, an Exxon-Mobil shift supervisor, who lives in Joliet, Ill., has donated $982 to Obama as of January. She also has a blog profile on Obama’s campaign Web site.

more...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/28/834887.aspx

[Life Long Dem]

1. That's not nice of you Hillary! Shame on you!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. $30K? $11K? $213K? $306K? 250H?

Peanuts.

[Vinca]

3. The faux scandals just keep on coming. nt

[MADem]

4. That's not very cool. It's false advertising.

There's that coal industry support, too. But then, all politics is local.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901503.html

[nichomachus]

5. All the more reason

All the more reason to get corporate money -- and religion -- out of politics.

Until then, we'll have more of this sniping.

[gateley]

6. Yes -- good point.

And the candidates are kind of over a barrel. WIth what it's costing to run a campaign, they HAVE to have those contributions.

I hope after this obscenely expensive presidential run, we will really re-vamp the process, and have all campaigns by completely publicly funded.

[bhikkhu]

7. The whole article is deliberately or carelessly misleading

Or perhaps describes an apparent reality, but presents its "facts" in support so poorly as to appear to undermine the intent.

At issue - the only donations mentioned to Obama are individual donations, bundled or otherwise. Individuals supporting the Obama campaign who happen to work for the oil and gas industry should be allowed and encouraged to donate. PAC money and direct corporate money, with strings and expectations attached, is an entirely different thing, and is entirely different from the evidence offered in the article.