Opponents Seek Gaffes in Financial Filings
Tuesday, July 17, 2007; Page A06
Opposition researchers plowed into the latest presidential filings yesterday, hunting for a nugget that might have the same impact on an opponent as the two $400 haircuts discovered in former senator John Edwards's last expense report.
Virtually every major campaign was scouring the newly filed campaign spending reports for potential bombshells and distributing discreetly -- "off the record" -- what they turned up to reporters around the country. "These researchers are hoping for inconsistencies in position. Flip-flops," said Mike Berman, who was a campaign adviser to Walter Mondale. "They also look for the cute stuff -- something that can be a little embarrassing and maybe throw a campaign off its stride. Will it endure? Who's to say?"
Knowing what might capture the public's fascination is no more predictable than figuring which videos will take off on YouTube, he said. But every once in a while there is a "macaca" moment.
What made the cut was a blend of hypocrisy, personal indulgence and, in some cases, simple irony.
There was, for instance, the discovery that on the same day Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was telling union officials that he "won't shop" at Wal-Mart, members of his staff were in a Wal-Mart in Bedford, N.H., buying $182 worth of office equipment.
Or that the Edwards campaign bought items from Harris Teeter at the same time labor in North Carolina was staging a nationwide protest of the grocery chain -- with Edwards's backing -- because of its relationship with the anti-union Smithfield Packing Co.
Republican Rudolph W. Giuliani's campaign got tagged for paying $15,215 to the candidate's own consulting firm, Giuliani Partners -- for "rent."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/16/AR2007071601883.html