Let's get this Friday started: WaPo spanks Obama.
It ain't Glenn Miller, but it should get you in the mood.
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 | Barack Obama | campaign finance reform | Washington Post — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I do believe that the the Washington Post is a little annoyed at the junior Senator from Illinois:
The Politics of Spare Change
Even $85 million wasn't enough to get Barack Obama to keep his promise.BARACK OBAMA isn't abandoning his pledge to take public financing for the general election campaign because it's in his political interest. Certainly not. He isn't about to become the first candidate since Watergate to run an election fueled entirely with private money because he will be able to raise far more that way than the mere $85 million he'd get if he stuck to his promise -- and with which his Republican opponent, John McCain, will have to make do. No, Mr. Obama, or so he would have you believe, is forgoing the money because he is so committed to public financing. Really, it hurts him more than it hurts Fred Wertheimer.
Pardon the sarcasm. But given Mr. Obama's earlier pledge to "aggressively pursue" an agreement with the Republican nominee to accept public financing, his effort to cloak his broken promise in the smug mantle of selfless dedication to the public good is a little hard to take. "It's not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections," Mr. Obama said in a video message to supporters.
It goes on from there: as Ed Morrissey himself notes, the WaPo isn't buying this as being anything except a typical politician facing a situation where he has to choose between keeping his word and seeking an advantage (I would recommend this article from the Center for Responsive Politics for those wishing to protest that statement). Which, when you think of it, is one of the more damning things that you can say about the man.
Oh, well. No doubt Obama will attempt to redeem himself with his base by aggressively opposing the passage of the FISA bill today.
Moe Lane
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | The Audacity of Abandonment — Comments (22) »
Let's get this Friday started: WaPo spanks Obama. 11 Comments (0 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Anyone have a full quote from Obama on what he actual promised? I'm getting hounded.
"First you win the argument, then you win the vote." - MARGARET THATCHER.
So let's start winning the argument.
Clearly the writer for the Washington Post is bitter.
One might also suggest that they may be religious.
It is possible, then, that if they are also white that they are a typical white person, clinging to their religion.
I'd say guns too, but this is the Washington post.
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.
Kinda hard to drink the kool-aide and care about your guy keeping his word at the same time.
-----------
Drill...Drill...Drill!!!
This reversal bothers me a bit.
Between the two candidates (sorry Nader, I like ya, but there's little to no chance of you winning...), I'm leaning towards Obama, but each week there seems to be something that makes me look a little more in McCain's corner. I could care less about his former pastor, and the lapel pins 'issue, but this doesn't feel right.
I guess the silver lining, if there is one, is that he's willing to change his mind when a better alternative appears. This is something we haven't seen for several years from the White House...
Still, something about this bothers me to the core...
Being able to change your strategy when circumstances change is vital. It shows you are thinking and are aware of what is happening.
Obama never presented this as a matter of strategy or tactics. He presented this as the goal, that presidential campaigns should be publicly funded. This was the right way to do things, the other created problems and allowed corruption.
He hasn't changed his tactics to win, He has decided he didn't care about the goal he told everyone was important.
Might that be what bothers you ?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I don't think it's quite that succinct in my mind, but my short answer to your question is 'yes'.
In my opinion, anything that can be done to remove money from the election process is a step forward for America. However, taking a principled stand on that, and then backtracking because it's convenient seems very wrong. I would feel much better watching Obama lose on a level playing field, than winning on a change of principles.
Thanks for the reply Joliphant.
So no need to worry about him "winning on a change of principles"....also wouldn't there need to be a set of principles for him to violate in the first place....so far all I have seen are positions....not principles.
"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy
conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777