Follow the money

When a reporter pursues a story on politics, the fundamental rule is “follow the money.” When any media outlet decides to publish the story, they spin it in terms designed to enhance ratings - another version of following the money. But by the time it reaches the consumer, the rules have changed: we’re supposed to follow (and swallow) the spin.

You know the spin:

• Iraq is poised to give WMDs to Al-Qaeda!
• Tamiflu® will protect us from a scary pandemic flu sure to hit the U.S.!
• Mission Accomplished!
• Hillary Clinton’s ascendancy is inevitable!
• The use of torture against enemy prisoners doesn’t violate the Geneva Conventions or pose any risk to our own captured soldiers…
• Clinton fund-raising surges on the heels of PA victory!

How many of those stories/issues did you swallow the spin for instead of asking questions?

Let’s follow the money on just that last one, shall we? The real story coming on the heels of the PA primaries is that despite spending to get his message out and close the gap by using issues to combat the advantage of Clinton’s name recognition, the Obama campaign remains well-funded by well over a million small donors, while even the well-documented surge hasn’t pulled the Clinton campaign out of debt.

That’s right, the number of people financially supporting Obama’s bid for the nomination is fast approaching 1.5 MILLION donors. People who never participated in campaigns before, let alone donated money, are coming up with $5 and $20 to chip in to fund their hope, sensing a chance to transform the way insiders have dominated the agenda and outcomes in Washington D.C. Wealthy people always donate to politicians, seeking influence - some even donate to both sides to hedge their bets. You can try to spin a big deal out of who a lawyer or real estate mogul donates to, but it’s a familiar story line.

The campaign finance news this time around isn’t about who’s donating, following the money it’s “what, if any, are the differences in campaign donations?” The evidence is clear. The statistics are unprecedented: Barack Obama has got grass roots support totally unlike anything any other candidate has ever amassed, and he hasn’t even secured the nomination yet. Conventional thinking about campaign financing is obsolete. The grassroots finance committee concept is hard at work, and small events (such as the “$5 on 5/5! Cinco de B.O.!“) pop up nearly continuously on both the Obama web site and others (such as the recent efforts tied to Earth Day awareness on EnvirObama.) You can be one of the thinkers, or you can watch and swallow the spin, but you can’t escape the facts.

So, have you been following the money, or the spin? Who made money when the government bought all that Tamiflu®? Any idea? It’s time for a real change.