Orly Taitz: How She's Paying for Senate Bid

Nicknamed "Queen of the Birthers" in the popular press, Orange County's Orly Taitz is challenging Dianne Feinstein for her seat in the U.S. Senate.

Most of Orly Taitz's campaign contributions are coming from her own wealth, according to statements released by the Federal Election Commission.

Taitz, a Republican, is challenging Democrat Dianne Feinstein for her U.S. Senate seat. Feinstein has held the seat since 1992.

Taitz loaned herself $280,000 on May 30, according to a document received May 31 by the Secretary of the Senate.

Other donations to the Taitz campaign include four individual contributions of $250-$300. Two of these were from California residents.

Records also reveal that Taitz's committee donated $500 to The California Republican Party.

So far Taitz has spent very little on her campaign other than the $3,400 filing fee to run. The only other expenses she lists were paid to Aristotle International, a Washington, D.C.-based political consulting group that specializes in web design. She spent a little over $200 for their services.

Taitz is best known for her court case against the Social Security Administration, where she attempted to prove that President Barack Obama is not a U.S. citizen. That case was .

Feinstein has over $2.6 million cash on hand, according to the FEC. Her May 2012 donors included musician Herb Alpert, who donated $1,000, former baseball commissioner Peter Ueberroth, who donated $1,000 and Santa Margarita Company CEO Anthony Moiso, who donated $2,500.

met00 June 05, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Nothing like having the good professor put it in terms that even you can understand... http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/paul-krugman-tired-you-people Suzie's commentary on the video is right on. Government spending is the "oil" that keeps the economic engine running smoothly. The answer to a low oil light isn't to drain the engine oil.
tinytom June 05, 2012 at 06:38 PM
Ya, but building an engine is a whole different thing.
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 06:50 PM
@met00 - Thank you for the Krugman post. I am aware of the Keynesian Economic Theory. It is one of many theories. We're not talking about what rolls around in one's noodle, but in the realm of what has been. Please go back to the WWW, research the Spain choo choo and the Japanese choo choo. Let the good readers know what the population densities of these tribes and what you think the comparison is for the prospects of the Cali choo choo. I'll babysit your unicorn while you research. ps - i LOVE choo choos
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 06:51 PM
Brash, please take a web-shot of my post. I AGREE WITH YOU !!!
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 07:15 PM
@met00 - LOL "Give me a progressive and I'll be happy to get rid of DiFi." - Sounds like an undisciplined 'sell out' position to me. Funny - I'll keep the less bad one until I get a more better one, but I am a true believer 'progressive.' "But just how many progressives have the MILLIONS it takes to run a statewide election?" - Translation, I want politics without money. Ok, met00. Let's put you in a round room so you can go sit in the corner.
met00 June 05, 2012 at 07:26 PM
Let's see, we have been through economic calamity in the US before. What worked? Why government investment worked in pulling the economy out of the hole. Whether it was the investment of the new deal, the WPA and the CCC under FDR, or the investment of increasing the government payroll under Reagan, it was the temporary expansion of government spending that put oil into the economic engine and allowed it to run smoothly. Hey, here is a great idea. We know that the greatest period of working class / middle class growth was 1952-1959. Let's return to those wonderful economic policies of yesteryear adjusting all the financial numbers for inflation. Of course that would mean changing the tax code, but since we know what has worked, and it hasn't been the 30+ years of trickle down Chicago School theory, let's go back to what worked before that was foisted on America.
met00 June 05, 2012 at 07:34 PM
Ah, let me guess, you think corporations are people too, and that money equals speech. Next you'll be telling me that Guv Walker isn't wholly owned by the Koch brothers. Or maybe that the answer to our energy problems is "drill-baby-drill". And let's not forget that man-made climate change is a hoax. Go look at what Justice Stephens said about Citizens United in the last week. Sorry, I guess I believe that buying the government is bad. Now what was it Mussolini said about government and business in bed together? He gave it a name. What did he call it? I'm sure it will come to me sooner or later, but whatever it was, it wasn't a good thing. I think we in America even fought against it.
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 07:39 PM
Professor met00 - No choo choo research? Naughty you. "... 1952-1959. Let's return to those wonderful economic policies of yesteryear adjusting all the financial numbers for inflation." - Ok, met00. Let's nuke Japan (and China, Korea and Singapore while we at it) and carpet bomb all of Europe so the great ol' US of A can be the only game in town. That was such a lovely period in our history. Ok, you win met00. Just send everyone one a check for $1m, the interest rates are low and your new 'great deal' will take us to the promised land.
tinytom June 05, 2012 at 07:42 PM
You say: "it was the temportary expansion of gov't spending that put oil into the economic engine and allowed it to run smoothly." You're confused when you say that gov't spending allowed the economic engine to run smoothly, because the economic engine had to be built. The impt thing is not the oil (money), but what the money is directed to. If like today it's not being directed to productive things that enable us to support more and more people at higher standards of living, then it ain't working like it should.
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 07:58 PM
met00 - No, People are Corporations. Better? Your MSNBC recitation aside, you must be frustrated: "Sorry, I guess I believe that buying the government is bad." Most people sell out when the person (or corporation) doing the buying is from their favorite team. Glad to see you're a true believer. For your pleasure, Common Cause discussion on "Keeping Money Out of Politics" http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4764307 For your pleasure, Common Cause Portal for "Donating Money for Politics" https://www.kintera.org/site/apps/ka/sd/donor.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4860657&en=mrIOJSNAL7IGLZMFJ8JGIWOFKnI1LaMEIfJRKVNDIdLNK7PPKvF Contradictory? Nah.
met00 June 05, 2012 at 08:02 PM
Yeparoo, are you off your meds? I really attempted to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I can see I was being far to generous. Go back to Faux News and don't let reality bother your little head.
met00 June 05, 2012 at 08:13 PM
Tiny, You and I have been around this track before on other threads. There are two theories at work. There is the one you seem to believe, and that we have been on for the last 30 years, that private investment and the rich investing will broaden the economy, and the one I believe, that we are a consumer-driven economy and that the government spurs growth by investing in infrastructure and R&D... the system that was in place for the 30 years before that. The last growth we had (not the housing boom and bust) was from new business models on the Internet. The Internet was not created by private investment, but by government R&D (I was there at the beginning working on paychecks tied to DARPA funding). Watson @ IBM said he could only see the need for a dozen or so computers, but it was NASA's needs (government funding) that brought the technology to make them smaller, faster, and into a business and consumer product. History tends to support my belief that the systems in place 30 years prior to the last 30 were ones that worked, and ones we should return to. But, as I said, you and I have done this dance too many times already for me to rehash it again with you.
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 08:36 PM
Ok met00 - But what if people don't ride the choo choo, but instead need adult diapers. How will the choo choo infrastructure help us?
tinytom June 05, 2012 at 08:49 PM
Yes, the development of space technology through NASA, and then spun off into new developments into the civilian economy is, as we both agree, very good. It is the idea that we as consumers causes this as opposed to people as producers and creators is what irritates me. Take a less developed country like say Chad. Don't the people there all want to consume? So if the consumer causes economic development, is what differentiates them from us is that we have 1st world consumer needs and so that is what business builds, while their demands are for little global villages with no electricity?
tinytom June 05, 2012 at 09:50 PM
Here met00 is what has been written out of American taught economics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_System_(economic_plan)
Dan Avery June 05, 2012 at 10:05 PM
Hey Yeparoo, if you want to have a serious adult level discussion and be respected, you should drop the eight year old level "choo-choo." Really can't take people who talk like that seriously.
Dan Avery June 05, 2012 at 10:14 PM
Tiny Tom, Wikipedia is not a credible source because they let anyone with a modem and a six pack of beer edit the sucker. Find a peer-review journal if you want to support your arguments. Or prepare to not be taken seriously. Wikipedia...now that is funny!
Yeparoo June 05, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Dan Avery - Ok, then can we stop calling Sen. Feinstein DiFi? Seriously.
MFriedrich June 06, 2012 at 12:16 AM
Excuse me while I laugh out loud. More government spending? Seriously? The Keynesian economists had their day and we can all see the results. People think that Roosevelt's program spending ":worked" in the Great Depression, only it didn't. How long did the great depression last? Two years? 3? No, over a decade. It was the US's comparatively late involvement in WWII (1941), a brief war duration (4 years), and a fortunate resulting global monopoly on production capabilities (everyone else's factories were destroyed or underdeveloped) that hauled the US economy out of the Great Depression. Not government spending. This is not going to happen again in 2012 or 2013 because the US HAS NO PRODUCTION factories. The US is a service economy now. After the Greece and Spain financial crisis dominos fall, guess who's next? Wrong. It will the UK, who has the highest debt-to-GDP ratio on the planet, then followed by Japan, China and the US. No amount of government spending is going to prevent this or get the US economy on track. IWhat's needed (like 8 years ago) is sound monetary policy, an increase in consumer SAVINGS (capital build-up) - not more consumer spending, and a dramatic reduction in government size and spending (debt). It's the only way.
Yeparoo June 06, 2012 at 12:32 AM
You heard right mfriedrich. What we need is MORE STIMULUS. The reason it didn't work before was that not enough money was spent. Not the 1.5t Obama stimulus. Not the 2.5t Bernanke QE1, QE2 or twist. We need to spend more because Paul said so and he is smart. That is why the Keynesians are now proposing what is called the "Money from Helicopters" Economic Plan. Unfortunately, the 'Government' has a hard time allocating capital, but at least not in this instance. This stimulus-stimulus plan (From a reliable source) is rock solid stimulus spending: Stimulus dollars funded erectile dysfunction study in California (Creates 00.85 Job) http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/16/11730775-stimulus-dollars-funded-erectile-dysfunction-study-in-california?lite
tinytom June 06, 2012 at 12:52 AM
"The US is a service economy now." ? And you think this is ok to service debt and consumer spending based on the accomplishments from the past forever? The problem with Keynes is he doesn't specify what to spend on. So with it you just "prime the pump" by getting people to dig a hole and then fill it back in. Plus with Keynes you finance the spending from private banking at the going free market rate. Instead you could have a National Bank to generate credit, or you could have a tiered preferential interest rate from the commercial banks to generate loans to companies that do what is deemed in the national interest. Whereas those companies that want a loan for anything else can get one at the higher going free market rate.
MFriedrich June 06, 2012 at 12:52 AM
Congratulations Sacramento on the incremental nano-employment achievement. Just when people might again accuse you of doing nothing, you smash your critics with these shocking numbers. And the research? "Stimulating" no doubt.
Dan Avery June 06, 2012 at 12:58 AM
Hey Yeparoo, I'm completely in favor of all adults stopping the "cute baby-talking" thing. She should be called Senator Feinstein. Out of respect for the office if nothing else. I had stopped venturing into this discussion because they are never very intelligent to begin with. But the baby talk...good God. Whose idea was that? The world already knows exactly how immature the vast majority of Americans are; there is simply no good reason to confirm it with stupidly chosen diction.
MFriedrich June 06, 2012 at 01:19 AM
No Tiny, I don't think it's Ok to service debt and consumer spending based on the past into perpetuity. It's a national disgrace that the US is this badly in debt in the first place, though not a surprise at all given two 10 year pus foreign wars plus Fed ultra-low interest rate tinkering and resulting malinvestment (gambling) to create a.....now wait for it..."Homeowners Society". Bwahahahahaa! I endorse another view. The US federal government elected officials (Reps and Senators) must stop pretending they know what they're doing regarding our complex economy and financial markets, and put an end to their winless track record of taxpayer funded "stimulus programs". They simply do not work and instead prolong the financial crisis, unemployment and destabilize markets. There's a reason why the housing market in the US has crashed, but not recovered, despite billions of US taxpayer funded and Realtor-cheerleaded stimulus packages.
Tim June 06, 2012 at 02:16 AM
Yes, Diana Frankenfeinstein will be re-elected to a new Senate Minority... she will be right alongside a distraught Harry Reid as he has his gabble ripped out of his hands by the new GOP majority.
Yeparoo June 06, 2012 at 04:29 AM
Oh Orly, how we will miss thee. US Sen 2012 - RIP
john June 07, 2012 at 02:51 PM
My wife worked for this crazy bit..ch in her RSM office. She forced her to do illegal dental procedures to make money. How is she still practicing dentistry when she is doing illegal procedures on patients.
Pancho Villa June 08, 2012 at 03:57 PM
A. The claims were filed out of state and not under the jurisdiction of the California bar? B. She offered free dental work to the Bar Association board? C. Her "campaign" was a tax writeoff, since she could then deduct any expenditures as bad debts. That would earn her status with any tax lawyer.
Dan Avery June 12, 2012 at 05:11 PM
Yeparoo, I like the way you lay one stimulus onto Obama and the other onto Bernanke. It's a tacit admission that Bush wasn't in charge after all. The Truth always comes out, eh?
Yeparoo June 12, 2012 at 05:39 PM
@Dan Avery - Actually, both were Bush's fault. I forgot to mention that. Thanks for the reminder. In fact, Bernanke is in deep consultation with W Bush as we speak about whether or not we should have a QE3. Black helicopters warming up now. Bush's "Stimulus Lites" were a bozo moves that didn't work and would never work. It's what politicians do when they panic. Try to save the electorate from current pain and maybe they'll forget who's fault it was when the crap really hits the fan years later.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something