A "level playing field"

I just received this fundraising request from Clinton's campaign:

Here's what you need to know this morning. We were outspent in Wisconsin by a 4 to 1 margin on ads -- and we can't let that happen on March 4....

Let this remarkable two-person contest for the Democratic nomination be determined by the strength of our ideas, the quality of our leadership, or the depth of our experience. But whatever you do, don't let the outcome of these crucial March 4 contests be decided by a lopsided spending advantage for the Obama campaign. [original emphasis]

Only you -- our incredible online community -- can act quickly and decisively enough to create a level playing field. And with everything on the line, that's exactly what I'm asking you to do.

It seems to me that the reason more people are donating to Obama's campaign (over 509,000 so far in 2008!) is that more people are being inspired by his ideas, his leadership, and his experience. The money isn't coming out of thin air, Hillary. It's coming in hundreds of thousands of small contributions from people across the country who are ready for change.

As for a level playing field, the Clintons are master fundraisers and began this race with a huge list of previous donors to call on.

Hillary has money to put commercials on the air. She's spending plenty in Ohio and Texas. If she was outspent in Wisconsin, it's because her campaign made a choice not to invest there.

Choices have consequences. You can't whine after the fact about losing a state if you didn't work to win it.