Who's Buying The White House?

Bill Dyer at Hugh Hewitt's blog offers the following analysis and proposed solution:

The Democratic National Committee dropped roughly $150,000 on Obama's fake-Greek temple. The Republican National Committee dropped roughly the same amount of money for Gov. Palin's campaign wardrobe. I could not possibly care less about either of these factoids.

I do care very much, however, that in September alone, Barack Obama raised one thousand times either of those expenditures. By election day, he will have spent more money in an attempt to buy the White House than both Bush-43 and Kerry spent altogether in 2004.

And millions and millions of dollars of those funds are illegal donations made with phony names.

Contra John McCain, I don't believe it is practical or constitutional to limit campaign contributions. I do believe it is legal and an ethical imperative to acquire, and immediately and continuously disclose, accurate and complete information about the source of all political contributions.

Americans deserve to know precisely who's trying to buy the presidency, and then they can draw their own conclusions. But right now, my conclusion — and the only possible conclusion, given the massive sums of improperly reported cash that Obama is spending — is that criminals are trying to purchase Barack Obama's election.

This is a direct, inescapable consequence of Obama's breaking of his solemn vow regarding public campaign financing. It's of a piece with his letting convicted politician-briber Tony Rezko help him finance the purchase of his own house. When it comes to campaign financing, Obama cannot be trusted. He cannot be believed. And he has no shame — only money, and money, and more money.

For more on Obama's illegal and foreign donors (and his lack of action to prevent them), check out my previous posts here and here, and some other links here, here, and here.

Dyer is right - I'd love to see Congress pass a law that requires 100% disclosure of every penny donated to a candidate.  I'd even accept the elimination of all maximums/caps on donations if it meant we got 100% transparency.  If George Soros is trying to buy Obama's way into the White House, fine.  If Obama is willing to accept money from Palestinian terrorists, fine.  But let's not hide any of it - I say let's see every ugly penny of those efforts, and then let the American people decide if they should be rewarded.

There's my two cents.