FemiSex raised the Red Flag of potential donor fraud via foreign donors to Camp Obama way back in June of this year.

Indeed, Obama has remained a most secretive candidate, unwilling to allow vetting of his small donors among other things of import. This is akin to Dick Cheney’s refusal to allow open vetting of his energy policy machine. This is yet another troubling parallel to the closed-mouth policy of the Bush admin that lead American down a torturous path to a war that was not fully vetted by the press, and in turn dis-allowing the public adequate information.

FemiSex fears that in Obama we are just trading the secretive machine of the far Right Bush Admin for another secretive machine of the Far Left in Obama. And worse yet, the MSM with the tools, resources, and cachet to do true investigative work, is once again abrogating its duty to vet troubling circumstances that are of national importance. American’s must surely know if illegal donations are behind the juggernaut of Funds flowing to a candidate who has evenly divided this country, first in the primary season and now in the general election season.

Femisex is run by journos with a proven track record of investigative journalism. But this web site is only a means to alert the public. We have not the tools nor the means to spend unpaid hours doing what the mainstream media ought.

Now, when it is too late to make any difference Newsweek and the Times have begrudgingly taken notice, but only because their hand was forced by the Federal Elections Committee when it went public with significant fraud they have uncovered in Obama’s small donor base.

When Femisex first wrote about the potential for abuse and red flags pointing that way, Obama had collected a record-breaking sum of $265 million despite “having only a 31% approval rating (among white voters) in a Times?CBS poll?”

Now Obama has collected a new record breaker--$450 million, despite a near national tie, or with Obama slightly behind until just the last week or so. The math is Fuzzy…hmmm, were have American’s heard the term Fuzzy Math before? Oh yes, by Dubia Bush…the last time American’s were taken to the Bank.

Press accounts of uncovered election fraud:

Newsweek excerpt “Controversy over Obama’s small donors”:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/162403
--------------------
“Consider the cases of Obama donors "Doodad Pro" of Nunda, N.Y., who gave $17,130, and "Good Will" of Austin, Texas, who gave more than $11,000—both in excess of the $2,300-per-person federal limit. ….

"Neither name had ever been publicly reported because both individuals made online donations in $10 and $25 increments.”

"Doodad Pro" listed no occupation or employer; the contributor's listed address is shared by Lloyd and Lynn's Liquor Store in Nunda. "I have never heard of such an individual," says Diane Beardsley, who works at the store and is the mother of one of the owners. "Nobody at this store has that much money to contribute." (She added that a Doodad's Boutique, located next door, had closed a year ago, before the donations were made.) “
"Good Will" listed his employer as "Loving" and his occupation as "You," while supplying as his address 1015 Norwood Park Boulevard, which is shared by the Austin nonprofit Goodwill Industries. Suzanha Burmeister, marketing director for Goodwill, said the group had "no clue" who the donor was. She added, however, that the group had received five puzzling thank-you letters from the Obama campaign this year, prompting it to send the campaign an e-mail in September pointing out the apparent fraudulent use of its name.”
--------------------------------
And…if ever a flag was raised for the media to investigate, this from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/06/us/politics/06donate.html?_r=1&ref=pol...
--------------------------------------
“Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign, however, actually raised the issue during the Democratic primary. The Obama campaign only recently began requiring donors from overseas to provide a valid United States passport number. Previously, it only required them to check a box confirming they were citizens.”
--------------------------------------
And finally this from Femisex last June:
http://www.femisex.com/content/flush-obama-%E2%80%93is-obama-being-massi...
-------------------------------------
“It seems likely that Obama’s campaign is being MASSIVELY FUELED BY FOREIGN DONATIONS. Now, because of our system this can never be proved but facts can point this way. "

"For example from an article in the LA Times: "Barack Obama is positioned to mount a general election campaign on A SCALE THE NATION HAS NEVER SEEN, fueled by hundreds of millions of dollars in private donations. And: Obama's already deep pool of about 1.4 million donors is expected to swell.”

This strikes me {Femisex}as odd, considering the polls show Obama and McCain in pretty much a statistical dead heat. And Obama didn’t even win the popular vote in his own primary. SO WHY SO MUCH CASH? This guy is--media luvn’aside-- an average candidate. “
---------------------
Femisex:
Such Red Flags would surely have sent sexist-biased msm journo scurrying to vet anything they could of Clinton’s or Palin’s donors, yet, only when the FEC reported massive Fraud to camp Obama did a blog site {Newsmax} run a donor-fraud story!!

And finally this sad finale from the New York Times, basically admitting they can only do their job if a blog site leads them to it like a dog to a bone.

--From the Times story:
---------------------------
“The issue is being seized upon by the Republicans against the Obama campaign after an article this month on the conservative Web site Newsmax.com highlighted some obviously questionable contributions Mr. Obama had received…”
--------------------------------------
So now we have Newsweek and the Times following rather than leading on investigative stories on Obama. Oh boy, irrelevance, be thy name, and a sorrowful nation will once again be let down. Fuzzy jouralism, indeed.

Update:

The New York Times decided to do a bit of reporting on Obama’s donor fraud issues. Note …We say a bit and mean it! The Times claims they did
“An analysis of campaign finance records by The New York Times this week found nearly 3,000 donations to Mr. Obama, the Democratic nominee, from more than a dozen people with apparently fictitious donor information. The contributions represent a tiny fraction of the record $450 million Mr. Obama has raised.”
--
The Times says that some fraudulent donors “were listed simply with gibberish for their names…”

The Times tells us that the 3 dozen they found “represent a tiny fraction” of Obama’s donors.
What the Times DOES NOT TELL US is that they seem to have weeded out what a third-grader might weed out…names such as “Jockim Alberton that works for “Fdsa Fdsa,” and a contributor who used the name “Jgtj Jfggjjfgj,” and listed an address of “thjtrj” in “gjtjtjtjtjtjr, AP,” and, “Test Person, from “Some Place, UT,” and “Doodad Pro and Good Will”, and “Fornari Usa,” listed the same “Loving” and “You” as Doodad and Good Will under employer and occupation”

So now The Times says rest assured folks…!! We’ve found the fraudulent donors that a 3rd-grader might find. See its all over folks.. not Big Problem only a thjtrj problem!

Femisex says....whoopee Times, good work, ace! In reality what the Times found does “represent a tiny fraction” of the fraud that most likely has occurred. And still…the Times make no mention of how voters can be Fully assured that massive donations have not poured in from overseas, from folks more wily, with better intelligence, and the Will not to be caught so easily by listing their address as &%$$!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/us/politics/10donate.html?pagewanted=2...

UpDATE: link to Obama Donor Fraud story:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10272008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/dubious_...