Obama gets some knocks on finance decision
Democrat Barack Obama's decision to forego public financing so he can raise as much as he can privately was a calculation that any short-term political damage for appearing to break a pledge would be far outweighed by the long-term political gain of being able to vastly outspend Republican John McCain.
And indeed, newspaper editorial boards are knocking him today. Some say they resent his effort, in a video announcement to supporters, to say that he is championing democracy through his army of small donors.
The Washington Post declares that "his effort to cloak his broken promise in the smug mantle of selfless dedication to the public good is a little hard to take."
"Mr. Obama had an opportunity here to demonstrate that he really is a different kind of politician, willing to put principles and the promises he has made above political calculation," the editorial continued. "He made a different choice, and anyone can understand why: He's going to raise a ton of money....Fine. Politicians do what politicians need to do. But they ought to spare us the self-congratulatory back-patting while they're doing it."
Commentators on the right are even less forgiving, casting Obama's move as his latest flip-flop. Jim Geraghty of National Review writes that "all Obama promises have expiration dates."
But many liberal bloggers seem to have decided that the ends justify the means. Chris Bowers of OpenLeft writes, "An Obama victory in the general election is worth nearly infinitely more than following an abstract ethical principal about the role of private money in elections, especially considering that the vast majority of Obama's money will come from small donors giving $250 or less. The only donors he would owe his victory to are grassroots progressive activists."
New York Times columnist David Brooks, in a particularly smart take, sees Obama's move as the latest sign that there are two Obamas.
"Barack Obama is the most split-personality politician in the country today," Brooks writes in today's Times. "On the one hand, there is Dr. Barack, the high-minded, Niebuhr-quoting speechifier who spent this past winter thrilling the Scarlett Johansson set and feeling the fierce urgency of now. But then on the other side, there’s Fast Eddie Obama, the promise-breaking, tough-minded Chicago pol who’d throw you under the truck for votes."
With his decision, "Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue. He aspires to be to political reform what Bono is to fighting disease in Africa. He’s spent much of his career talking about how much he believes in public financing....But Thursday, at the first breath of political inconvenience, Fast Eddie Obama threw public financing under the truck. In so doing, he probably dealt a death-blow to the cause of campaign-finance reform. And the only thing that changed between Thursday and when he lauded the system is that Obama’s got more money now. And Fast Eddie Obama didn’t just sell out the primary cause of his life. He did it with style. He did it with a video so risibly insincere that somewhere down in the shadow world, Lee Atwater is gaping and applauding."
Meanwhile, consumer activist Ralph Nader is trying to make the most out of Obama's decision, asserting that it is further evidence that for all his talk of changing Washington, Obama is captive to the same corporate interests.
"The old Obama said he would abide by public spending limits in this election," the Nader campaign told supporters today. "The new Obama he says he won't....You know where Nader and Gonzalez stand on corporate power. And that isn't changing."
From one concerned citizen of U.S.A,
Dear American Voters, reporters, media. professionals, political parties, and presidential Nominees,
Hon. Senator McCain and Obama, besides each having many attributes and characteristics.
The critical differences between the two of these presidential presumptive nominees in my opinion are as under:
1. Presidential "Temperament and Caliber".
2. Little Washington "insider Versus outsider" experience.
3. "Vision and mission" for our nation future rather than past.
4. American policies, " first U.S.A Centric" than any other country [ ies ] centric.
In my professional opinion Senator Obama leads in all above qualities and attributes.
Senator Obama and his administration along with congress will address all the critical current and future domestic and foreign issues, challenges, and opportunities in coming the years.
Our citizens have and follow attributes as under:
" Family, Friends, Fellows, Faith, Funds, Foundation [s], Fun, with Freedom & Fairness and without Fear, Favor, & Failure" .
Please stay involved, stay engaged, and stay informed. Please do not allow any seduction, deception, and or confusion by some partisan media and leaders effect your vote [ What I label as Psychological Terrorism of deception, seduction and Brain washing perpetuated by some media outlets for decades. These Meedia outlet and so called pundits claim to care about our Nation].
Dear Americans, please do not allow yourself be duped, seduced, and brain washed this time ].
Yours truly,
COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
Disabled American Veteran
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas
PS: Please talk about the " Presidential Temperament And Caliber " of our presumptive presidential Nominees. We do talk about the "Judicial Temperament" of our Supreme Court Justices nominees and so far we have failed to talk about the " Presidential Temperament " of our presumptive presidential nominees. The " Presidential Temperament " is the ultimate and in my opinion only requirement of our president as that effects every living soul here and around the world.
Thanks again.
Give me a break. Public financing is a joke because it is insufficient to financially support a modern presidential canidacy. The fact that 47% of his donations come from small doners in the amounts of $200.00 ----and less-- is far more reformative than accepting insufficient funding. What Barak has done is to prove that you do not need to be beholden to corporate lobbies or fat cats in order to run a campaign. Furthermore, by demonstrating the potential of the internet to reach the public and bypass expensive advertising he has revolutionalized the system such that others will do what he has done. In other words, the public financing system is outdated and you reporters know this. But then, you guys are just trying to make a cheap headline because after all, business is business and you need to reinforce your own puffed up sense of importance.
Democrats 08!
What's the problem with Senator Obama opting out of public funding for the general election? Mr. McCain did the same thing during the primary campaign -- if it's good enough for McCain it should be good enough for Obama!!
Typical hack politician Obama Barack did exactly what everyone but the kool-aid drinkers knew he would do.
He is the last thing this country needs.
This is nonsense. McCain will have tons of money spent on his campaign outside of the $84 million coming from donors to the RNC and various other "non profit" swiftboat style organizations.
Nice try, guys. Obama still is the better candidate.
Wake up, stupid, for still thinking (aka dreaming) that Obama is what he is not. He is just another dirty politician, who makes promises and breaks them without missing a beat. He just so happens to be younger, that's all. And you think he stands for "change"? And you think he'll do anything differently? Are you out of your mind? He's been doing all these dirty deeds in-your-face, and you Obama supporters can't even see it??
He did it. He said it. His aides did the same. His friends and associations are just as dirty as "Friends of Angelo". I'm so absolutely sick of this Obama. He's going to be as bad as Bush the idiot.
First, the Obama "commitment" to use public financing was clearly and expressly conditional on the GOP candidate's agreement to do the same thing, and that never happened until after Obama decided--sensibly-- not to go with public financing. McCain didn't have an "evergreen" option to require Obama to go one way or the other on financing. If he wanted to make a deal he could and should have taken a position on a timely basis--not played "wait and see" and "gotcha" depending on what was most polically advantageous to the McCain interests. And then play sanctimonius and hypocritical moralizing about a beach of the agreement he chose not to enter into. Obama made an offer, not the gift of an open-ended option that McCain could "call" , if ever, when most expedient to his campaign. Shame on those who should know better for mischaracterizing this.
Second, the whole purpose of campaign reform and public financing is not game-playing, but to eliminate the pernicious effects of PAC and corporate money as a distortion of the democratic process. When small donors in the millions support a candidate, as they do with Obama, the evils of PAC and corporate financing are obviously not present. There is no public policy or reform basis for Obama to be compelled to reject the purely democratic and non-distorting effects of such grassroots contributions.
Those who criticize Obama in this matter are either misinformed or cynical
hypocrites.
The problem with Obama opting out is that he should be above such actions. His words should mean something but obviously he is just another political flip flopper. I fear this man cannot and should not be trusted.
This is not about public vs private campaign financing - it's about keeping your word. If this is an example of Senator Obama's personal integrity, maybe I will stay home in November...
Wow... How is it that nobody here seems to care that Obama broke his promise and lied to the American people? Enough of the evasive and diversionary posts expressing his emminent qualifications and your undying support. Please just answer this one question:
Do you as an Obama supporter care even one iota that he broke his promise to take public financing for his general election campaign?
I don't understand why us regular citizens shouldn't be able to support a candidate financially, while rich donors and lobbyists are able to influence Washington with their large bundles of cash. A system where the public donates to the candidate they support is more "public financing" than where taxpayers donate to an general fund.
And why would anyone listen to a guy (David Brooks) that has to resort to name calling (Fast Eddie?) and for some reason is trying to heavily promote the phrase "under the truck" over the more well known "under the bus". His logic fails me and I would hardly call his take "smart". What was his point, vote for McCain, the candidate with more integrity?
Why don’t reporters do real work for a living? This story and its headline is another perfect cheap shot example. Senator Barak is showing you that he doesn’t make choices or a afraid of what the media might think, so I think he shows strong will and some balls, your story has nothing informative.
Dear readers,
The presidentila candidates will always be under scrutiny. if they drink water from tap, reporters will report that as hazardous to the national security, if they drink bottled water they will report it as promoting business. It is not a big deal that Senator Obama decided to forego public financing. He still is not accpeting high dollar volumes from lobbyists and special interest groups. He is running a grass-root campaign the way it should be. Is it a flip-flop that he wentback on his words, you bet. But, is it a sin... absolutely no. It is pure mathematics. If he doesn't spend money to promote his vision, philosophy, and agenda and as a result he loses, it is a lost cause. hence, he decided to make a move that gives him better chances of winning and making the changes he has promised the American people. I hope our citizens will understand the situation and make their decision accordingly.
Obama has raised record-breaking sums from small donors, and the idea that the Internet and grass-roots donations will somehow reinvigorate our democracy is appealing. But this notion is not borne out by the evidence.
Employees of Goldman Sachs have contributed more than $570,000 to his campaign.
Just 36% comes from small donors giving $200 or less. So although roughly one-third of Senator Obama's money comes from Internet, smallish donations of under $200, where do people think the vast majority is coming from? It comes from the same "fat-cats" that all politicians rely on.
That to me speaks to the character the "Colonel" talks about. The fact that Barack Obama is content to allow the public (and especially his own supporters) to be mislead as to the source of his massive funding, speaks volumes. As does his habit of going back on his word for personal gain.
Obama is not a new kid on the block. He knows the venom that comes from the right wingers and how deadly their poison is, when leashed. swift boaters and groups like them are not dead, and will not spare OBAMA. Obama has learnt lessons from not only what they did to Kerry, but the whole right wing machine. He has been able to rally a new generation of donors, and surely enough, if he can tap on those resources for his presidential campaign, so be it. Why settle for 84 million dollars when you have grassroot supporters who can give more? Republicans have more money than democrats and will support McCain come November. He should not cry foul, because Obama is doing the right thing, given what is coming ahead.
Just more evidence that Obama is exactly what we thought.
An ambitious Typical Politician that will do or say ANYTHING to get elected. And His Integrity be DAMNED!
Another lie and broken promise in a long list.
So much for "Change" and "different kind of Politician". These were OK slogans for the Primaries when he just had the liberals to impress, but he knows that in the General, Main Stream Americans aren't going to fall for it.
So, thanx for being so gullible, Democrats. Now just vote for Obama and shut up!
"What's the problem with Senator Obama opting out of public funding for the general election? Mr. McCain did the same thing during the primary campaign -- if it's good enough for McCain it should be good enough for Obama!!
Posted by knarahs June 20, 08 11:55 AM"
I guess breaking a promise made seven times in a year is OK to you.
Where's YOUR integrity and self respect?
This guy has lied to YOU, too!
WOW!
knarahs...the agreement he made had nothing to do with the primaries, it was about the general election...Obama opted out in the primaries as well as McCain, Clinton, Giuliani, etc. Obama is the first ever to do this for the general election. McCain has agreed to public funding for the general election, so your argument doesn't hold water.
The whole point of this move is that Obama is not limited to an $84 million spending limit for the general election (I think that number's right). As far as the ends justifying the means, that's fine and a valid argument, but no matter how you dress this up, it's still a broken promise.
“Senator John McCain has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”
--Sen. Barack Obama
Just at least an acknowledgment from the Obama crowd that this is what it is would be nice. Obviously something like this isn't a deal-breaker for a supporter, but can you honestly call it anything other than a lie?
In the end, it's a smart move for Obama. Why give your opponent equal ground when you have the advantage?
you guys are all crazy. How do you know he is reformer? How do you know he is gonig to do any of the things that he says he will do. No one can know because he keeps changing his promises and his words as it suits him. If he breaks a promise on one of the corner-stones of his campaign, how do you know he is going to keep his promises on anything
Maybe after he becomes president, he will give a pardon to Osama bin Laden, send all sorts of arms to Hamas and Iran. No one can predict anything because he keeps changing his words and promises as it suits him.
The worst is that he takes us for fools. Well others like Hitler, Marx, Mao etc have done the same thing with people. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans can be easily manipulated by the likes of Obama (Bush before him) and can be taken or a ride.
Only thing that we can judge him (or other candiates) is by their ability to keep their promises. If they don't then all the promises that they make is just hog-wash
Yeah sure, Obama is a "same old same old" political figure for turning over the financial basis of his campaign to his army of small donors and grassroots supporters. Pull the other one, we're not buying this crap guys (especially from Brooks, who is completely full of crap). McCain is not a high minded idealist for opting into 'public financing' while giving a wink and nod to the 527 groups lining up to spend unlimited funds tearing Obama to pieces while trying to pressure Obama into handicapping himself. In the meantime you may want to check the latest news. MoveOn just closed down their 527 operation in response to Obama's expressed desire that those kinds of groups do not operate on his behalf. This following the DNC shutting out lobbyist donations to match the Obama campaign policy once Obama took control there. THAT is reform in action, not McCain's system-gaming.
Obama IS using public financing, only he's doing it RIGHT. We're the public. We're financing him. We PREFER it that way. Get a clue. I have more important things to have my tax money spent on that on McCain's presidential campaign when I don't want him anywhere NEAR the White House, which is why my response to if I wanted to contribute to public financing on my tax forms this year was a hearty 'hell no'. If I want to support a presidential campaign I'll send my money directly to the candidate I actually *want* to be president. And that's the way it should be.
Actually, McCain did nothing of the sort. Both his request and opt-out have not been acted on by the FEC because there are only two commissioners - not enough for a quorum to act on requests. Seems that one Senator has put a hold on both the Democrat AND Republican nominees, to prevent a quorum from being established. That Senator's name is....Barack Obama. Who now calls the sytem 'broken', without disclosing that HE'S the one who broke it!
Obama explained his decision to rely on private donations in a video posted to his website. 23/6 has added hilarious closed-captioning for any disillusioned supporters: http://www.236.com/news/2008/06/20/conservatives_confused_mccain_7260.php
It might be worth mentioning somewhere in this discussion that John McCain has been violating campaign finance law for weeks now. He accepted public financing for the primary, obtained a loan using the public financing as a guarantee, and then tried to get out of it claiming he got no benefit from it. He has now far exceeding the spending limits placed on candidates who accept public financing.
This isn't just some partisan take either, the Republican chair of the FEC told McCain he can't opt out. McCain will probably get away with this because the FEC lacks a quorum, but there it is. "John McCain in violation of McCain-Feingold" should be the headline.
Obama's decision is legal at least.
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Send your comments to masspolitics@globe.com
browse this blog
by categoryINside Boston.com