You're taking the dinner out of context and twisting it to make a relatively weak point from an already weaker argument.
Just because Obama holds a fundraiser does not mean he is out of touch with hardworking people, especially when the dinner is marketed towards celebrities. Also, who is to say that celebrities or people with large amounts of money aren't hard working. You seem to take for granted that large amounts of money = you don't work hard. Unless the money was hereditary, often times the exact opposite is the case. They have to be doing something right or else people wouldn't give their money to them. Unless everyone with large amounts of money suddenly became unethical scam artists, I'd say they are working pretty hard.
Regardless, that's beside the point.
If you want to play selective readings from you article, try these on for size
A night earlier, McCain was with deep-pocketed donors in Florida and raised $5 million, a fact noted by Obama's campaign.
And more importantly
Obama is financing his presidential race with private contributions after abandoning a pledge to take public financing capped at $84 million... McCain accepted the $84 million in taxpayer funds allotted by the public financing system for the race.
Your argument fails to hold any water now. If you still want to argue against Obama, you would be hypocritical in support of the republican camp. The article, unlike you tried to twist it, does not offer any empirical proof that Obama is a hypocrite and McCain is better. Please find better commentary or at least commentary which you don't need to omit large portions of to make your point.
