Wow, that would be a development. The news of that would be embarrassing, and that might be worse than the gain of the additional funds.

And that's not even considering the angle raised above - just where is that money coming from? Suddenly the uranium kingpin story comes to mind.

I agree that the story could be devastating: a struggling campaign -- short of enthusiasm but desperate to win -- turns to dirty money.

Ummm-why is it that anything Hillary Clinton does immediately results in negative comments like this? Romney has pumped 35 million of his own money into his campaing and I don't hear crys of "dirty money."

Could this be one more instance of anti-Hillary gender bias? It is amazing how the same action by a man isn't criticized as harshly...

Think about it gentleman.

Obama does not take campaign contributions from lobbyists nor from political action committees. The majority of his contributions are from small donors, normal folks.

My head, heart, and soul would so much hope for a campaign like Obama to take the Presidency than one enriched my uranium sales.

Hey Don - comparing Hillary to Romney as a defense just about says it all for ya.

Back to reporters starting up rumours again! Having no facts, make them up as we go along again style of reporting!

It might look bad, but the media will get over it, and it could keep her alive. It worked for John Kerry in 2004...sure, it looked like a sign of trouble when he took out a second mortgage on his home to keep his campaign alive, but it kept him alive and he ended up winning the nomination.

As an Obama supporter, it is satisfying to see that they don't seem to be able to attract nearly as broad of a donor base, but at the same time, I'd be nervous if they decide to do this.

If Hillary takes Bill's money to fund her campaign, this is just one more bit of evidence that she has done little on her own. Who would even know who Hillary was if she had not been married to a president. On the other hand Obama has gotten to where he is on his own, the son of an immigrant, raised by a single mom and funded by the larges number of small donnars ever seen in presidential campaign. We don't need Hillery bucks at this time in our historic momment.

Don - Romney has taken loads of criticism for funding his own campaign. In fact, its the conventional wisdom answer right now for why all the other Republican candidates have developed an anyone-but-Romney attitude. Don't know if that's true, but that is the prevailing interpretation.

Yes, Romney put lots of his own money into the campaign, true... but it was HIS money, that he EARNED.

Big difference. It's not "gender bias" to ask where Hillary Clinton is getting her money. We all know where Romney's came from, we just aren't sure where the Clintons are getting theirs.

Though I really wonder how much Kerry's house is worth if he can finance a campaign on it!!! I want one.

Another difference is that Kerry was struggling to come from behind - remember he was in single digits in Iowa a month out from the caucus.

Clinton was the 'inevitable candidate,' who was expected to crush the field six nine months before Iowa under the weight of her fundraising prowess.

Romney may be using his own hard-earned money, but anyone who hasn't noticed a certain sneer toward his spending from either other Republican candidates or the media hasn't been paying attention to both races.

I don't see it as a gender bias. I think people see Romney as a rich guy who earned his money in the private sector. 20 million from lifelong public servants just attracts more scrutiny.

Rezco will make sure his boy Obama is taken care of, money will be there if he needs it

What?! You mean the one with the great message and all the 35 YEARS of experience is low on CASH?! I guess the message wasn't so good after all.

I suspect this is a 2fer punch and just a ploy to reach out to the elderly and women voters. Because she knows women and the eldrely can identify with a cash crunch and/or the poor princess struggling. Therefore, they will come running with their money and support. Just manipulation if you ask me.

If it is real, then why talk about it? If you have the money, clearly she should spend it. Romney is buying his way into the WH, there is no reason why she shouldn't do the same. We already knew she was rich, and was hardly someone that could identify with working class idiots that voted for her.

Hillary for the first time, I am on your side. Write those checks today girlfriend.

This story is just a cheap shot, invented fabrication. Hillary has plenty of money on hand and lot's more pouring in every day. I should know. I work for her campaign. Another Obama smear tactic as usual...

Huh, John. Could be a fundraising ploy. It kinda fits into her usual play-the-victim tactic when pressured. I'm disappointed with myself. Usually I come up with ideas like that, but this time you beat me to it.

All the money Obama has and all the Mass. help plus Oprah could not help Obama in California.

Actually it did, Charles. Obama only lost California by 10 points. Factor for the early ballots, and on primary day it was probably much closer.

And because it was so close, Obama avoided the delegate blow-out there, which allowed him to win the day, though by such a small amount its a bit of an overstatement to call it a win.

Still, being on the plus end of a small differentiation is better than being on the minus end.

Ever wonder if the young voters are supporting Obama because there may be a chance he'll legalize pot. I think the young voter should only cast their ballots under the careful supervision of parents, grandparents, and more mature relatives. Remember, they are the generation of quick and instant everything. Fixing this great nation of ours is going to take vision and patience.

Laura - you want legal voters to be supervised in the voting booth? Wow. Are you saying it takes a village to cast a vote?