“…There are way too many overseas contributions and I find it hard to believe they are all American citizens. How does the FEC monitor that? Some of contributions appear to be “bundled” from one person as source to hide the contributions of many, and an example of one among many such “incidents” will clearly show why I arrive at such a conclusion..

A red flag is a donor like Jeanne McCurdy. Look at the contribution excerpt below. It’s a compilation of a mere four pages of listings, pages 40-44, approximately 9% of the pages of the total document I received, and it lists contributions made by a Jeanne McCurdy, who is always listed as unemployed, and who does not have an address at least as can be found in the files provided (and, as you might well expect, no phone number or email address either).

John did a computation of her contributions from roughly Aug. 07 through Feb/Mar of 08, and it is over $1200. She ranges from a $15 to a $400 contribution, most running $25/35 to $50. Several of her separate contributions are listed on the same day, a very curious way to make campaign contributions, which are usually in response to mailed solicitations. (She should accumulate them, save on postage…) .

The important point to remember about illegal contrbutions is that you can win the election using them and the only result will be a fine after the fact.

At the moment the FEC is impotent because the Dems will not appoint any new members and there are not enough members for a quorum.

Yes, George Allen, where is he when we really need him?

But the shine is definitely off the brass where Obama is concerned: he really did initially promise to be an unusually daring, honest and interesting candidate, but he really is rapidly turning back into a pumpkin in that respect. It isn't just his backpedalling on some very important FISA reforms, either. It's also:

(1) His ducking of his earlier promises regarding public financing of his campaign -- there's a strong case that McCain has actually been breaking the law here by misusing private primary-campaign contributions for the general election, but Obama seems totally unconcerned with bringing up that fact provided he's allowed to renege on his own promise;

(2) His own impossible-to-deny evasiveness regarding his longtime relationship with Pastor Wright; and

(3) The now-clear fact that he dislikes talking to the press at all.

So. Better than McCain? Overwhelmingly, I think. "The most exciting candidate in nearly half a century"? Not any more. (On the other hand, he is also unquestionably the most genuinely intellectual major-party nominee at least since Stevenson, and maybe longer -- which means, I suppose, that once he's actually elected he might turn exciting again. But I really do come originally from Missouri, and in this matter you now will definitely have to Show Me.)

Postscript: while we're making comparisons, John McCain is infinitely preferable to his namesake -- whom I first ran into a few years back after he'd written a piece for the Washington Times in which he enthusiastically defended Trent Lott's support for segregation. The unsurprising moral is that, no matter how bad So-And-So is, you can always find somebody else worse.

Most of us who are political junkies have already decided who we are voting for, and most of the people who don't follow politics that closely will wait until after the conventions and after the debates start.

At that point both candidates will need to be reaching out to voters and prepping for debates and won't have time (or the desire to be caught at $1,000 a plate dinners) to fundraise consistantly.

I'm a Democrat who liked Obama at the start and was intrigued at his message and style. I never thought he would redeem us, but his flip flop on FISA really disgusted me because it was one of those things that really represented Bush's moral bankruptcy to me. Nobody will stand up to Bush, ever. Certainly not the GOP rank and file, and no Dems either. The Democratic fear of Bush is exhausting, their cowardice makes me wish that both parties could lose until someone took a risk and exhibited some real leadership.

My point is that my disenchantment with Obama - I still like him in a vague, watered down way and see him as more of a typical liberal - is pretty widespread, I think, among Dems. Sure he's better than the empty suit McCain, but I'm tired of choosing the least of two evils.

All this is meant to disagree with this post's assessment that 'despite all this,' McCain's only behind a few points.

Yeah, point taken, but Obama isn't such an interesting candidate anymore either, esp. to Dems.

McCain Working for Dollars, Not Votes?

Well, Duh!!! Hell, if he was looking for votes he wouldn't be defending his comprehensive immigration reform, talking about "obscene profits" of successful corporations, and the need to keep ANWR pristine.