Now...I find it VERY INTERESTING that the writers choose to use the word gibberish in their article because that is the word I chose to use back in early August for these kinds of donations. Coincidence?
From the article:
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. But the questionable donations — some donors were listed simply with gibberish for their names — raise concerns about whether the Obama campaign is adequately vetting its unprecedented flood of donors.
And then there is Obama's Gibberish Donors ....
I found this last week and posted it on google docs. It's in the article: But even a contributor who used the name “Jgtj Jfggjjfgj,” and listed an address of “thjtrj” in “gjtjtjtjtjtjr, AP,” was able to contribute $370 in a series of $10 donations in August.
It appears that campaign finance records for Senator John McCain, the Republican nominee, contain far fewer obviously false names, although he has taken in about $200 million in contributions, less than half Mr. Obama’s total. Mr. McCain did collect about $173,000 from donors who appear in campaign finance records with only a name and have no other identifying information. Mr. Obama collected about $314,000 from such donors.
I couldn't BEGIN to tell you how much money the Obama campaign has taken that has a name only. Blanks in the other fields or information requested. PLEASE! There is no way it is only $314k.