Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's latest ad focuses on high gas prices and energy indepenence, Rob Christensen reports.
What the ad says: "Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing's changed — except now Exxon's making $40 billion a year, and we're paying $3.50 for gas. I'm Barack Obama. I don't take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won't let them block change anymore. They'll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We'll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil. I approve this message because it's time Washington worked for you. Not them."
The background: ExxonMobil reported earning a record $40.6 billion in profits in 2007. The average national cost of gas on April 7 was $3.33 per gallon, according to the Energy Information Administration.
It is technically true that Obama has not taken money directly from oil companies, because direct corporate contributions have long been banned.
But Obama's campaign has accepted $213,000 in contributions from people who work in the oil and gas industry or their spouses, according to the Center For Responsive Politics. And according to FactCheck.org, Obama's campaign has received money from executives of ExxonMobil ($30,850), Hess ($5,200), Shell ($9,900), ConocoPhillips ($4,300), Chevron ($9,500) and BP ($6,396.)
Obama's oil and gas industry contributions are a tiny fraction of the $193 million that Obama’s campaign has raised and are less than Clinton has brought in from similar sources.
Is the ad accurate? The assertion that Obama does not receive money from the oil industry is misleading. Accepting contributions from oil industry executives, as opposed to their political action committees, is a distinction without merit.




Re: Bull hockey
Jeeves, write that fella a note, would you? I'm just a regular Joe. My desk is made of nothing but simple oak.
— RTB