If you look on the surface, the race in AD71 appears to be neck and neck. At first glance, both Neil Blais and Jeff Miler have raised about $360,000, and both have about $230,000 Cash On Hand.

But that's where the similarities end. If you look inside the numbers at all, it's becoming increasingly clear that Neil Blais' campaign finance reports would make even Enron's accountants blush.

First is a matter of what is clearly just show money. Back in June, two days before the end of that campaign finance reporting period, Neil loaned himself an odd amount of money - $64,597.42. Well, what do you know - two days before the close of the December reporting period, he loaned himself the exact same amount of money, down to the cent. For anyone who's ever been involved in a campaign, this is a tell tale sign that the candidate has little intention of spending the money in his campaign. I mean, if you've had to take out a line of credit just to make your campaign seem competitive, but have to play the hokey pokey with the money going in and out before each reporting period, few serious people in politics believe the money is really going anywhere. The $100,000 Neil has loaned himself is staying right where it is.

Then there's a matter of outstanding debts. This is another old trick that candidates play. They stop paying their bills for weeks leading up to the close of the reporting period, just to minimize what it looks like their expenditures from the period were. Neil's campaign ended the period with over $23,000 in debt.

And let's not forget the "General Election" money game that unserious candidates like to play. This one goes like this: a candidate only allowed to raise $3,600 per person per election. What that means is that Donor A can only give Candidate X $3,600 to spend in the Primary. But if the Candidate gets to the General, the Donor can give me another $3,600. So, some candidates just collect all $7,200 up front, providing an artificial boost to their reported numbers in the meantime. But in a practical sense, the money does them no good during the course of the Primary, as they can't spend any of it. Neil Blais is certainly playing this game too, having over $18,000 in "General Election" money that he's counted towards his supposed parity with Miller.

As I said at the top, when you look inside the numbers, Neil's campaign is all show, and no dough. If you take his reported $230,000 Cash on Hand, and subtract his $100,000 loan that he can't even afford to part with for six months, subtract his $23,000 in debt, and subtract his $18,000 in "General Election" money, what you're left with is less than $90,000 that he can actually spend, or barely more than 1 out of every 3 dollars he claims to have.

It's all right there, when you look inside the numbers.