Patterico's Pontifications

6/19/2008

Obama Breaks Public Financing Pledge

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 12:55 pm



Barack Obama has officially broken his public financing pledge:

Sen. Barack Obama has switched course on general-election funding, announcing this morning that he would reject public financing and raise every dime for the fall campaign on his own.

Obama’s word is his bond.

Unless keeping his word becomes inconvenient.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

P.S. Obama’s pledge was crystal clear. So it will be interesting to see how many media organizations will report just how clear his pledge actually was.

I’m guessing not many. They’ll buy the spin that he promised nothing more than to aggressively pursue an agreement — but McCain wasn’t interest in reining in the 527s, yada yada yada.

But this spin ignores one simple word: the word that Obama used when he was asked if he would take the pledge.

That word is yes.

Watch them spin that word. Just watch them.

164 Responses to “Obama Breaks Public Financing Pledge”

  1. cue republican indignation! tribal music from those backed by corporations and 527 groups that this upstart dares to take millions of dollars from private citizens after he said he wouldn’t. does anybody else care? more small violins needed for the string section.

    assistant devil's advocate (0cbed9)

  2. No………..really?

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  3. Allow me a moment, as I must practice assuming a lock of shock and surprise…

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  4. ADA, Obama could have used 527’s himself, and in fact would have the support of maybe the largest in the country, MoveOn.org…

    So really, any indignation Republicans display will be based solely on the fact that Obama said one thing (and was very clear about it), and is doing the EXACT opposite, and is doing so because it better suits him.

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  5. When he made that promise he probably thought that there was no way that McCain would get the Republican nomination (and he may well be quite surprised that he is the presumptive nominee for the Dems). So when he made the promise, it may have been under the assumption that it would never need to be followed through on. Not that that excuses his not following through now, but it may have been an easy promise given that the odds of the nominees being McCain v Obama at that time seemed pretty long…

    kimsch (2ce939)

  6. “Oh bother” said Pooh…..

    of course he lied: it’s what he does best.

    redc1c4 (098bd2)

  7. But he’s a different kind of politician who is big on hope ! and change! Looks like Dick Morris is right about Obama not giving a fig a high oil prices. Of course the high prices are because of BusHitler and nothing to do with a recalcitrant Congress. Obambi likes high oil prices as dems don’t think we should be using carbon-based fuel. But then they don’t like nuclear power plants either or NIMBY wind farms that block Fat Teddy’s view.
    So I guess Urkel will have loads of dough for commercials to supplement all the media free love and Soros-sponsored 527s?
    Hopefully the unwashed masses of gun-toting, church worshipping white trash in red fly-over country will show the inexperienced chicago-way pol the door. Might not be enough trial lawyers, academia retards, hollyweirdo/media-scum, latte-drinking pseudo-intellectuals and knee-jerk automatic black voters to win this time.
    What about the recent flip flop on Nafta? What about the surreptitious meetings with more of the Hezzbollah/CAIR types?

    madmax333 (19dcbc)

  8. And, ADA, to add to Scott’s point in comment #4, isn’t the whole appeal of Obama supposed to be that he represents a “new style of politics” and “the change we deserve” and all that? How come he continually acts like just any other Chicago pol, except without any tangible accomplishments to buttress his mendacity?

    JVW (ce519b)

  9. assistant devils advocate wrote: cue republican indignation! tribal music from those backed by corporations and 527 groups that this upstart dares to take millions of dollars from private citizens after he said he wouldn’t. does anybody else care? more small violins needed for the string section.

    Puhleeeeze, you’ll spin yourself nauseous.

    Typical Dem response: “It’s OK when we do it because…because…we’re not evil.”

    L.N. Smithee (a438da)

  10. Slight disagreement with you, madmax333: Dems like high gas prices when they are due to heavy tax burdens going to government; they don’t like them when they represent money going to the free market. Conservation was always a Trojan Horse for them to argue for higher gas taxes.

    JVW (ce519b)

  11. let’s say you have a lawn party, and your basset hound, while very friendly, takes an inordinate interest in the contents of people’s plates. after he’s wolfed down a dozen deviled eggs, you confine him to your garage and he starts howling. the sound of republicans baying on the internet about this issue reminds me of what a basset hound locked in my garage would sound like.

    assistant devil's advocate (0cbed9)

  12. #10 but..but..but…we(dems) can nationalize the oil industry and perhaps sue the OPEC cartel. WE know that Chavez is doing a great job with the oil infrastructure in Venezuela. No reason the Black Congressional Caucus can’t do a crackerjack job with taxes on excessive oil profits?

    Being around government drones much of my life, I can only imagine how those yoyos would feck up
    the whole oil thing and drive supplies down and prices ever higher.
    Ok, China and India are using way more energy recently. That has some role in supply and demand BUT in 2003 the total value of trades in oil futures was $13 billion and TODAY is $260 Billion. We have capitalism and free enterprise. Why aren’t the wise men in Congress at all concerned about sticking it to the speculators? Start drilling domestically and watch those vermin run for the hills. American oil companies are midgets compared to the really big international companies.
    What is Obama’s plan? To sit with his fingers up his ass, from what I see.

    madmax333 (19dcbc)

  13. Obama’s pledge was crystal clear. So it will be interesting to see how many media organizations will report just how clear his pledge actually was.

    Well, here’s a sampling:

    The New York Times calls Obama’s early promise “a turnabout from his strong earlier suggestion. . .”

    The Los Angeles Times notes that he is “reversing an earlier commitment.”

    His hometown Chicago Tribune mentions somewhat in passing that Obama “had pledged late last year to stick to the public financing system. . .”

    So in regards to reporting how clear Obama’s earlier commitment was, it looks like the LA Times is being pretty strict, while the other two papers are leaving him some wiggle room.

    JVW (ce519b)

  14. ADA #11, I really like deviled eggs, so you bet I would howling if I were a basset hound locked in your garage.

    I hope my response was every bit as valuable as your fetid analogy.

    JVW (ce519b)

  15. Scott Jacobs wrote: ADA, Obama could have used 527’s himself, and in fact would have the support of maybe the largest in the country, MoveOn.org…

    Those lying lowest-common-denominator dorks are back on the whorepath, with their patently ridiculous spot using a baby to re-smear McCain with lies about his “100 years” statement, and another with a bunch of actors portraying bigoted Republicans that don’t care about women, gays, blacks, etc.

    Everything that needs to be said about the slimebuckets at MoveOn.org is said in that “Baby Alex” commercial: They think their target audience is dumb as a box of rocks, and will swallow lie after lie without thinking.

    To wit: the “Alex” spot calls for its viewers to believe that 1) John McCain meant continuing the Iraq war for 100 years rather than maintaining a peaceful presence of U.S. forces a la Germany, Japan, and South Korea (which even Obama acknowledged after being challenged on his continuing misinterpretations); 2) That somehow babies are at risk of being sent to Iraq within the four-to-eight years of McCain’s potential presidency; 3) That there is a way that Baby Alex could be sent to Iraq while the military is still volunteer-only; and 4) That the stupid mother saying “You can’t have him” could stop Alex from going if he wanted to go (hello, Cindy Sheehan).

    Obama, as I mentioned earlier, sheepishly admitted that McCain didn’t mean what Obama repeatedly implied he meant by the “100 years” remark. But do you hear Hussein-feld calling for MoveOn’s unfair attack ad to be stricken from the airwaves?

    L.N. Smithee (a438da)

  16. If the Republicans were smart, they would be preparing a series of ads that highlight Obama’s flip-flops and misstatements.

    This ad would display the questionnaire: If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?

    OBAMA: YES.

    Followed by the WPost quote: Sen. Barack Obama has switched course on general-election funding, announcing this morning that he would reject public financing and raise every dime for the fall campaign on his own.

    BARACK OBAMA BREAKS HIS WORD WHEN IT BECOMES INCONVENIENT. AMERICA DESERVES A PRESIDENT WE CAN TRUST.

    And so on.

    This could be followed by the “thrown under the bus” ad series…

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  17. let’s say you have a lawn party, and your basset hound, while very friendly, takes an inordinate interest in the contents of people’s plates. after he’s wolfed down a dozen deviled eggs, you confine him to your garage and he starts howling. the sound of republicans baying on the internet about this issue reminds me of what a basset hound locked in my garage would sound like.

    So complaining Republicans sound like loud dogs to you, huh?

    {Hmmmm…should I suggest what domestic pet Democrats sound like when they complain?……Naaah. It’s too obvious.}

    L.N. Smithee (a438da)

  18. LN Smithee: Go to hotair.com for more commentary on the moron.org ads and the two spoofs that have already popped up.

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  19. aunursa wrote: If the Republicans were smart, they would be preparing a series of ads that highlight Obama’s flip-flops and misstatements.

    Yeah. “If.”

    L.N. Smithee (a438da)

  20. This could be followed by the “thrown under the bus” ad series…

    You could get the folks who design and build Monster Trucks to make a bus able to take the human casualties…

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  21. If what you said the first time is not the right thing to say and you discover you were wrong, what would be the right thing to do? Anyone?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  22. Get the news media to pretend that what you said the first time wasn’t actually what you said the first time?

    Or better yet, get them to pretend you never said anything at all?

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  23. Evidently, Obama can’t even get himself to follow his own leadership. Makes the slogan on his podium look pretty funny.

    ADA, was that an attempt by you to parody yourself? if so, you were quite successful.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  24. #22
    Thanks Scott. I am just about to break a proposal and tell her “it’s me. It’s not you..”

    love2008 (1b037c)

  25. In Obama-speak, yuo should be saying “It’s you, not me…”

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  26. As HotAir Headlines would say, “Obama’s bus-driving habits reach inevitable conclusion”

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  27. #21
    Of course the people who have their heads stuck up Obama’s rectum couldn’t care less about his flip flops. Only us hicks can’t see that Urkel is the next Abe Lincoln and his pre-throw-Wright-under-the-bus speech was oratory for the ages and will be taught in schools 100 years from now. Bambi’s apologists are delighted to drink the kool-aid and be totally oblivious to his hypocrisies, duplicities and obfuscations.
    The fact is that Barry Hussein is clueless on many subjects, such as foreign affairs and relys on cretinous retreads from the Carter and Clinton administrations. And who really give a damn how many retired admirals and generals will give him cover? Hope he chooses that asshat Wesley Clark for veep.

    madmax333 (19dcbc)

  28. Obama never used the word “pledge.” You never call his words anything but a “pledge.” Talk about spin!

    The questionaire was described as an opportunity for candidates to “tell the American people how they plan to move us all closer to the more perfect union our nation’s founders envisioned.

    In their answers the candidates were “sharing with us and the American people their visions for strengthening the nation’s political system and restoring public confidence in our democratic institutions.”

    He revealed his plan, his “vision” in response to a question. He did not make a “pledge” to anyone. His supporters (the people who he’s making these plans for) do not feel let down that his plan/vision has changed.

    He didn’t break any “pledge” to his suporters.
    Instead, he just handed critics a nice big pie to throw in his face.

    And his critics, including you, have been fondling that pie, gloating over it, savoring the inevitable opportunity to throw it, for months now.

    But by calling this plan a “pledge” you’re trying to pretend this pie is a smoking gun. It’s not.

    The difference is that only those who already want to see Obama hit with a pie are amused by your antics. The rest of us just think you’re a prick who’s throwing pies at people for no good reason.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  29. none of the complainers would have voted for him anyway, and they would have found something else to complain about tomorrow. yes, i wish obama had a little more substance and experience, but this is what there is now, we get the government we deserve, this unpalatable choice is our own fault, the end product of our collective failures, for which i cheerfully take my minute share of responsibility, taking comfort in the fact that come this election day, i will be out on the lawn eating deviled eggs, parma prosciutto canapes and blini with caviar and sour cream with the other democrats, and you folks will be locked in the garage.

    assistant devil's advocate (0cbed9)

  30. #25
    How cruel Scotty! LOL! You are a heartbreaker.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  31. You are a heartbreaker

    My Ex-Fiance started sleeping around until I found out, in the hopes I would end the engagement…

    I might still be a tad bit bitter about that… :)

    He didn’t break any “pledge” to his suporters.

    No, just his pleadge to the entire population of America… No big thing, I’m sure…

    In case you never read it before Phil…

    If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?

    OBAMA: Yes.

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  32. Phil, an amusing attempt to make Obama’s reversal our fault.

    But not a very coherent attempt.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  33. But Scott, if we take Obama at his word, we are just pricks who throw pies at people for no reason.

    That’s Change for ya!

    SPQR (26be8b)

  34. No, just his pleadge to the entire population of America

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  35. Oops, incomplete post. Should be:

    No, just his pleadge to the entire population of America … No big thing, I’m sure

    Again, show me the word “pledge” anywhere but in Republican rhetoric?

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  36. But Scott, if we take Obama at his word, we are just pricks who throw pies at people for no reason.

    I said for no good reason. There’s a reason — you guys are trying, somehow, to get hyped up for this election. And the best thing you can come up with is to take potshots at the other side’s candidate — “at least we aren’t stuck with that pledge-breaker!”

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  37. Yes, Phil, and if you just keep repeating “no good reason” to yourself, you might convince … yourself.

    We now see that Obama can’t even lead himself.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  38. Phil,

    Is it your position that if Obama answers “Yes” to a question he isn’t bound by that unless he says it under oath?

    If so, given Obama’s national security adviser’s recent comments, wouldn’t it be more appropriate if Obama takes the children’s pledge that he will ‘cross his heart and hope to die’ when he answers?

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  39. We now see that Obama can’t even lead himself.

    If Republicans could come up with a decent alternative I’d be thrilled. I’m by no means happy supporting Obama, it’s just better than the miserable alternative.

    But of course, to do that the Republicans would have to return to true conservative principles, instead of being a bunch of fundamentalist religious-warriors who spend tons of money (but only to kill people pay special interests).

    If I’m going to have to vote for big government, I prefer big-hearted quasi-socialism to religion-pandering militarism. But what a sad choice to have to make!

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  40. DRJ, no evidently Phil’s position is that saying you are going to do something is not a “pledge”, no matter what the thesaurus says.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  41. “This could be followed by the “thrown under the bus” ad series…”

    He’s gonna need a bigger bus.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  42. Amusingly, I had CNBC on this afternoon, and they had a segment on energy proposals and some apologist for Obama actually said something that sounded to me like “well of course the Democratic presidential primary is no time to make reasonable policy proposals …”

    SPQR (26be8b)

  43. Phil,

    No matter how you try to spin it, you can’t escape Obama’s answer…

    If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?

    OBAMA: Yes.

    Not “Will you…”

    Not “might you…”

    Not “Do you plan to…”

    A direct question, an affirmative answer. It doesn’t get any simpler than that.

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  44. Is it your position that if Obama answers “Yes” to a question he isn’t bound by that unless he says it under oath?

    If he answers “yes” to a question, I’m saying I want to know what the question was. Did it say “do you pledge”? No.

    The questionaire made it clear that it was asking about the politicians’ plans.

    Now, Obama’s plan clearly changed. Would I prefer to have a representative who was better at divining the future, so he didn’t have to change his plans so much? Yeah.

    But is it a betrayal? No. It was a dumb plan to begin with. He’s corrected the dumb plan, and hopefully learned something.

    Yes, Obama’s young, and makes mistakes. Then again, he does seem willing to learn (unlike certain morons who’s only answer to every problem is “let’s declare war on it!”)

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  45. Oops…

    “Not will you…” should be “Will you…”

    [aunursa banging head against desk for not previewing]

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  46. Phil, for an encore, are you going to define “is” for us as well as “will” ?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  47. Phil, that’s a great idea for an RNC commercial….

    He didn’t say “I pledge”, so don’t hold him accountable for his word.

    BARACK OBAMA. HE’LL SAY ANYTHING TO GET ELECTED.

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  48. Look, if you guys want to crow about how Obama changed his plan to accept public financing, I’m fine with that. His plan was wrong for his campaign. That’s a perfectly valid criticism. He underestimated his own fundraising ability, and misjudged the political climate in America. He thought he wouldn’t get as much support as he has.

    It’s the implication that Obama is betraying someone’s trust that’s bullshit here. He’s doing what’s right for his supporters (because he has more support than he expected).

    Of course you guys wish he’d be bullheaded and say “yeah, my plan is dumb as hell, and will hurt my chances of getting elected, but I’m doin’ it anyway.”

    But that would be too Republican.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  49. Phil,

    Has Obama pledged to do anything? I don’t think he has. By your definition, then, we can’t expect him to do anything he says.

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  50. No, Phil #48, we want someone who does what he says he’s going to do. When I vote for politicians, I want them to do what they say they are going to do. Similarly, won’t liberals be very unhappy if Obama refuses to keep his promises, like withdraw the troops home from Iraq?

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  51. DRJ, what “pledges” do you want?

    If you want a president who simply tells you exactly what he’s going to do for four years, and then does exactly that, no matter what happens, then you don’t need a leader. You need a fortune-teller and a robot.

    I don’t want many “pledges” from my leader. I want plans. I want decisionmaking ability. I don’t want bullheadedness.

    I don’t want someone telling me “No matter what happens, no matter how stupid the idea turns out to be in light of unforseen circumstances, I am going to do XXXX.”

    That’s not a leader. That’s a moron who can’t think on his feet.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  52. I want a leader who thinks for himself, too, but they also have to mean the things they say. If they want to qualify their responses, they should do that.

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  53. When I vote for politicians, I want them to do what they say they are going to do.

    No you don’t. You want a president who will do what he says he’ll do assuming it’s still the right thing to do when it comes time to do it. You also want a leader who makes plans that generally turn out to be good ones, and thus ones he does not have to change.

    On both counts, Obama’s “plan” is an example of failure. His plan is no longer the right thing to do for his campaign, and it really wasn’t a particularly bright one in the first place — it assumed he would fail (or at least not vastly succeed) at fundraising compared to his opponents.

    But just because it was a bad plan (which I freely admit) doesn’t mean he broke a pledge, or was dishonest.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  54. In other words, Obama could have answered the public financing question “Maybe” or “Yes, but …” He didn’t so now we know he doesn’t mean what he says if a better deal comes along later.

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  55. I want a leader who thinks for himself, too, but they also have to mean the things they say. If they want to qualify their responses, they should do that.

    He meant what he said, and he didn’t have to qualify his response. The questionaire asked for his plan. He answered honestly, and described his plan.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  56. Honestly, Phil, don’t tell me what I want in a leader.

    DRJ (8b9d41)

  57. In other words, Obama could have answered the public financing question “Maybe” or “Yes, but …” He didn’t so now we know he doesn’t mean what he says if a better deal comes along later.

    Yeah, politicians should almost always say “I plan” or “based on what I know right now, I think.”

    Come to think of it, we should all qualify everything we say with those words. When you ask me “what are you doing tonight” I should say “I plan to do xxxxx” rather than “I’m doing xxxx.”

    That way, if it turns out that, say, I need to rescue my neighbor from a house fire instead of doing XXXX, you won’t say “Hey! You broke your pledge to do XXXXX!”

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  58. I don’t want someone telling me “No matter what happens, no matter how stupid the idea turns out to be in light of unforseen circumstances, I am going to do XXXX.”

    That’s not a leader. That’s a moron who can’t think on his feet.

    Comment by Phil — 6/19/2008 @ 3:15 pm

    Actually you make a very good point, applied to things that don’t involve benefit to oneself.

    However, when pretty much all the changes in decision I make just happen to be “things that benefit me,” especially when my original words benefited me too by giving me good PR, then my decisions seem to others not like good leadership but like self serving dishonesty. And rightly so IMO.

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  59. No, I get it. A “plan” is not a “promise”.

    A “plan” is not a pledge.

    Sen. Obama… when he is asked his position on virtually anything says, “I definitely plan to do “X” and not to do “Y”, you can count on that and put it in the bank. I am a different type of politician, I am for change and hope and a new type of politics”

    But, Senator…a plan is not a pledge, a plan is not a promise…

    “You people are all about distractions. If I say denounce, you want me to use another word…you people won’t accept my word and the clear meaning and intent”

    Ok…then when you say you are going to do something, you won’t simply go back on your word when it becomes politically expedient.

    “That’s my plan.”

    cfbleachers (4040c7)

  60. Honestly, Phil, don’t tell me what I want in a leader.

    All I’m really doing is saying that I respect you too much to believe you’re as bullheaded as that blanket statement made you look. But I admit I could be wrong.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  61. Its called “principle” Phil. He WROTE in response to a questionaire in November that he would agree to public finanincing in the general if he opponent did so.

    That’s the 3 month campaign between the conventions and the election.

    Obama knew in November that he was going to be able to raise far more money that the amount allocated by public financing. Yet he favored the principle behind public financing so he endorsed it in writing.

    Now that he sees that abiding by a principled stance would work a tactical disadvantage, the principle is less important to than the advantage.

    Nothing “hopey” or “changey” about that.

    I’m looking forward to 5 more months of exposing this guy as a fraud stalking horse for every left-wing advocacy group across the landscape. Its going to be fun watching his numbers sink in flyover country.

    WLS (68fd1f)

  62. In other words, Obama could have answered the public financing question “Maybe” or “Yes, but …” He didn’t so now we know he doesn’t mean what he says if a better deal comes along later.

    Comment by DRJ — 6/19/2008 @ 3:21 pm

    Agreed.

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  63. He didn’t so now we know he doesn’t mean what he says if a better deal comes along later.

    If you mean that Obama will not keep doing something that turns out to be stupid and unconstructive, just because, well, he said he was gonna do it, then yeah.

    Given the current state of Republican leadership, however, I’m aware that some people prefer the opposite.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  64. If Obama had wanted to leave himself a little wiggle room, then he should have left himself a little wiggle room.

    I would have more respect for him if he would be honest and admit that he is breaking his word because it’s no longer in the best interests of his campaign. He should explain that he’s changing his mind because he underestimated his fundraising ability.

    But don’t give us this nonsense about it being anything other than a pledge to which he is choosing not to honor.

    aunursa (1b5bad)

  65. Phil assures us that we can ignore everything that Obama says about his plans.

    Not news, but amusing that Phil thinks this is a feature.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  66. So, Phil, what we’re trying to get across to you is that you won’t be able to trust anything Obama says. Anything you hear now can be reneged upon just like this question-answer is being reneged upon. You may think it’s okay now because you see how it could be to your advantage, because you would prefer to see Obama as president and consider that to your advantage.

    The day may come when you actually want Obama to deliver on something he said, or a position he staked when answering a question. But you will find that that wasn’t his position all along. That he ‘never made that pledge’ to you. That today he finds it more convenient, more to his advantage to say and do the other thing, the thing that is directly opposed to your desires. I’m thinking you’ll be terribly disappointed. (My assumption is that you actually have things you would like to see done, here – if that isn’t the case, you are free to shift in the general liberal breeze as you like.)

    How many times has Obama said one thing and then had to go back on it? Or had a policy adviser say something, have it cause an uproar, and Obama have to go back on that? And then when the other position causes a different uproar, have to go back on that and be even more ambiguous? How many ‘unpaid policy advisors’ are there who make statements for Obama’s campaign as to his purported views and then are ‘revealed’ to never have been working for the campaign and we never meant that anyway?

    luagha (5cbe06)

  67. Big deal. He said he was going to take it and now he says he wont. So what? We all say things we regret later. Atleast he has the sense to change his mind. John McCain has done alot of his own flip flopping too. Big deal. This is politics folks.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  68. Phil is fantastic at parsing the meaning of words. Are we sure he isn’t really Bill Clinton?

    Nah, ol’ Bill would never expend so much energy defending Obama.

    JVW (ce519b)

  69. It was not that long ago that campaign finance reform was a key platform plank for the Democrats … like last week?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  70. Phil said

    He revealed his plan, his “vision” in response to a question. He did not make a “pledge” to anyone. His supporters (the people who he’s making these plans for) do not feel let down that his plan/vision has changed.

    I’m glad you used the word “feel” in that paragraph as I believe it represents the philosophical divide America faces this election cycle: the ongoing battle between those who let feelings determine their vote, and those who employ thinking to determine who they want as President.

    I submit that if you ask Obama supporters what they think about any given subject, an overwhelming majority would begin their answer with “I feel….”

    McCain is much to statist in his positions for me, but he does “think”. Obama (“Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life”) “feels”.

    I prefer the thinker to the feeler.

    Horatio (a549f7)

  71. love2008 #67, so when President Obama “changes his mind” and decides that our troops need to stay in Iraq at present levels for at least another couple of years, you and the other Obamaniacs are going to be fine with that right? Or is it only on certain matters that Obama is allowed to flip-flop?

    JVW (ce519b)

  72. Apparently this official statement praising Obama’s pledge by Russ Feingold is “no longer operative”:

    March 2, 2007

    “I commend Senators Obama and McCain for pledging that, if nominated, they will participate in the presidential public funding system in the 2008 general election, as long as their eventual opponent also participates. This is good news for the American people, who, thanks to this system, for over 30 years have chosen between two major party candidates competing on a level financial playing field in the general election. All candidates for President should take a similar pledge.”

    Shad (570754)

  73. So, Phil, what we’re trying to get across to you is that you won’t be able to trust anything Obama says.

    You can “trust” someone while still recognizing that they may not do exactly what they say they intend to do.

    We are all human, falible, and unable to predict the future. I can try to tell you what I’m going to do in the future, but I will often be wrong.

    However, if you know what my interests are, then when circumstances in the future change, you know that even if I won’t do precisely what I said I was going to do, I will act to further my interests. You can “trust” me to do that much more often than you can blindly “trust” me to do exactly what I predict I will do.

    Here, Patterico used his knowledge of Obama’s interests, and actually found that he was able to predict exactly what Obama would do. He’s predicting it for months. So, really, Patterico can “trust” Obama, as long as he doesn’t play dumb and/or hold Obama to the superhuman standard of having to know the future.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  74. I am surprised Obama didn’t use his stock repudiation line that he has been using the past few months…

    “public financing today, is not the public financing I knew for 20 years…therefore I reject public financing…and my church…and my pastor…and my various advisers…

    Perfect Sense (7cbfd6)

  75. #71
    We all change our minds when we feel it is in our best interest. If “President Obama” finds that keeping troop levels at present level in Iraq will be in the best interest of our national security, I believe he will do what is right. I would rather have a president who makes a mistake, realises it and changes course than a strong headed, stay-the-course, even when we are going over the cliff, commander in chief. Only a fool does not change his mind.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  76. Used to be, acting as a man of your word didn’t require superhuman effort.

    If someone holds themselves out to be “different” because the “other guy” can’t be trusted…then one might assume that acting exactly like the “other guy” would be hypocritical.

    Sen. Obama wants to play by a different set of rules. He is not responsible for adhering to his platform, only his “persona”.

    That’s not terribly different…but it should be terribly disappointing.

    And “it doesn’t matter” only to those folks for whom nothing of substance would matter…as long as the “message” and the “narrative” are followed.

    This “isn’t important” to them…because honor, integrity, honesty and keeping your word…simply aren’t core “issues” for them. Sticking to the narrative…by any means necessary…is just fine.

    cfbleachers (4040c7)

  77. love2008:

    But the issue of public financing of elections isn’t a matter of what’s in Obama’s best interest or McCain’s best interest.

    Obama and the Dems have always claimed to beleive that the public financing of elections is in the PUBLIC’s best interest.

    Now Obama has taken the position that where his best interest and the public’s best interest are at odds — f*ck the public.

    When Obama thinks his personal best interest — winning the election — is furthered by decision-making which works to against the public’s best interest, are we to simply sit back and applaud his ability to add up his contributions and realize its more than public financing?

    That’s a profile in courage.

    WLS (68fd1f)

  78. WLS, check out the Chicago Tribune link I provided in comment #13. Go down to the part where the, ahem, “non-partisan” campaign finance reform organization tries to explain why it is no big deal that Obama has backtracked on his pledge (yes, Phil, pledge). Just in case you for one moment thought that campaign finance reform advocates weren’t just part of the left-wing Democrat interest group orgy.

    JVW (ce519b)

  79. Phil needs to see the question, apparently, even though I quoted it in my comment, just to avoid such retardation…

    If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?

    OBAMA: Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. I introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and am the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold’s (D-WI) bill to reform the presidential public financing system. In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election. The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) 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.

    Does that clear up your little “failure to undersstand the writen/spoken word”?

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  80. “Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests.”

    Until short term advantage overrode my principles …

    There, Obama, I fixed that for you.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  81. That’s cute, Scott, notice how Obama describes it as a “pledge” toward the end.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  82. So, Phil…

    What part of ‘screw it, people are giving me too much money’ fulfills “I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”??

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  83. Silly you, Scott: You’re supposed to just listen to the sweet melodious baritone of Obama’s sonorous oration while gazing upon his handsome and dignified visage. You aren’t actually supposed to pay attention to what he says.

    JVW (ce519b)

  84. I’m glad you used the word “feel” in that paragraph as I believe it represents the philosophical divide America faces this election cycle: the ongoing battle between those who let feelings determine their vote, and those who employ thinking to determine who they want as President.

    I think it represents a psychological divide between people who rely primarily on force and determination in life, and people who rely primarily on empathy and communication.

    The former seems to believe that if you use enough force and determination, you can accomplish anything. Communication and empathy are nice if you want to feel good, but they are generally a waste of time in any sort of conflict. Force and determination are their primary tools to get through life.

    Thus, they respect force and determination — i.e., authority and single-mindedness. They desire predictability in other people (so they won’t have to worry about why people are acting the way they are), and in order to achieve that predictability, turn to force. If force doesn’t work, they exercise determination and use more force.

    The latter group relies primarily on communication and empathy. To them, force and determination seem blunt and useless — you might as well just flip a coin to resolve your problems.

    Instead, they believe that the better you understand the feelings and interests of others, the better you will be able to position yourself with people whose interests are aligned with yours. You can also both predict the future actions of others, and potentially offer them alternatives that will serve their interests even better.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  85. Phil #73 – You can “trust” someone while still recognizing that they may not do exactly what they say they intend to do.
    We are all human, falible, and unable to predict the future. I can try to tell you what I’m going to do in the future, but I will often be wrong.

    Entirely consistent with the Democratic viewpoint regarding Bush’s WMD intelligence and handling of the post-combat occupation.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  86. I think I’m getting more entertainment out of Phil’s hilarious dance on this issue than the rather obvious fact that Obama is a two-faced inexperienced, lightweight.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  87. What a nice self-serving definition, Phil. How about this one:

    Those who rely upon communication and empathy tend to think that they are so morally attuned and possess a superior understanding of human nature that they can reach agreements with just about anyone. This group believes that there is no tyrant that they can’t pacify, no malcontent that they can’t mollify, and no liar or cheat that they can’t ostracize by publicly shaming them. That their efforts more often than not prove futile (viz. Carter, Jimmy cf. Soviet Union, Cuba, Palestine, Iran, et alia) never seems to dissuade them from their obtuse narcissism.

    JVW (ce519b)

  88. Well damn, I was wrong. He did characterize as a “pledge.” It’s a really stupid, rhetorical “pledge,” but a pledge nonetheless.

    I apologize for my mistake in claiming Obama did not use the word “pledge.” He clearly did.

    I still think it was really a “plan,” not a “pledge.” But he used the word “pledge” himself, so he brought the accusation of “breaking” the “pledge” on himself. Fair enough. He should certainly be more careful about using the word “pledge.”

    Anyway, he hasn’t let anyone down by breaking the pledge — in fact, he would be doing a serious disservice to his supporters if he DIDN’T break it. But boy, making the pledge was not a smart thing to do.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  89. “I still think it was really a “plan,” not a “pledge.”

    LOL

    Man, I’m hurting myself here.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  90. Phil #60,

    Honestly, Phil, don’t tell me what I want in a leader.

    All I’m really doing is saying that I respect you too much to believe you’re as bullheaded as that blanket statement made you look. But I admit I could be wrong.

    I had to leave the discussion for a bit.

    Actually, I’m very bull-headed but that’s not the issue here. I want leaders to keep their word on fact- and principle-based promises because I and my fellow citizens depend on them to do what they say. Yes, something dramatic could happen (like 9/11) that might change things but in general people plan their future business and life decisions based on what Congress, the President, and the government say they will do.

    Obama’s public financing decision doesn’t affect my life but it tells me Obama places his own welfare above keeping his word, and there’s no reason to think he won’t do the same thing in other situations that might have a big impact on me.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  91. #77
    Okay wls, what do you recommend he does under these circumstances? What would you do if you were in his position? public financing will limit his spending ability and give an advantage to the opposition. He has proven an unprecedented ability to raise funds, more that any politician in a primary season. Would you really give up all that just because you dont want some people (who by the way wont ever support you no matter what you do) to be offended and call you a liar? or would you do what you would need to do to win? Honestly wls, what would you do?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  92. not a smart thing to do.

    Is that a crack in the smooth, perfect edifice? Quick, get some workers to patch it immediately!

    Oh, and if they’re wearing headscarves, make sure no one photographs them!

    Apogee (366e8b)

  93. Well, JVW, it’s pretty clear which side of the divide we both fall on. I don’t think it’s possible for the two groups to talk about each other without at least some disdain. We definitely disagree as to the usefulness of each others’ tools.

    I will say this — I utterly and completely suck at using force and determination. And you clearly have not been happy with the results obtained through communication and empathy.

    I’m so crappy at using force and determination that I, frankly, can’t imagine a reasonable way to run the world using it.

    So while I admit that empathy and communication don’t always work, I can certainly envision a lot more useful applications for them than I can for force and determination. With those, I pretty much just see a head endlessly slamming against a concrete wall.

    Conversely, perhaps you can’t picture positive results naturally flowing from communication and empathy, and just picture a bunch of people standing around talking and feeling, and then having a big bomb dropped on them.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  94. Phil – why does there have to be a choice of force or communication?

    Apogee (366e8b)

  95. To further clarify – It’s like saying “hammer or screwdriver, take your pick”

    Sometimes I need both.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  96. love2008 (#91), you didn’t address me, but if I were Obama I would tell my legion of donors to take the money that they would have given me and instead give it to their favorite charity (except, as we have seen, liberals aren’t so great about giving to charity) and that I would get by with the public financing that Sen. McCain has accepted. I wouldn’t worry too much about “giv[ing] an advantage to the opposition” since no candidate in my memory has every been given more of a kid-gloves favorable press treatment than Obama. Uncle George Soros and the Sugar Daddies at the public employee and teachers unions will have their menagerie of 527s take care of rebutting any “unfair” attacks by Republican operatives.

    JVW (ce519b)

  97. why does there have to be a choice of force or communication

    There doesn’t — I originally said that in general people seem to tend to rely a lot more on one than the other.

    That’s not to say you can’t use either one, try one and then the other, or even try both at the same time.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  98. #91 – What advantage to the opposition? The opposition is taking public financing as well – that’s what the pledge was all about.

    kimsch (2ce939)

  99. So while I admit that empathy and communication don’t always work, I can certainly envision a lot more useful applications for them than I can for force and determination.

    I’ll think about that one next time I try to hammer a nail into a wall. Maybe if I could just understand why the nail doesn’t want to go into the wall I can work out a solution that has the nail, the wall, my hammer, and the picture I am trying to hang all in accordance and perfect harmony.

    JVW (ce519b)

  100. We definitely disagree as to the usefulness of each others’ tools.

    Sorry, couldn’t leave that one alone. It’s a perfect description of both candidates, IMO.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  101. People who pretend that the Bush administration has not been engaging in extensive diplomacy since 9/11 are either astonishingly ignorant or astonishingly dishonest. Or both.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  102. I’ll think about that one next time I try to hammer a nail into a wall. Maybe if I could just understand why the nail doesn’t want to go into the wall I can work out a solution that has the nail, the wall, my hammer, and the picture I am trying to hang all in accordance and perfect harmony.

    Yeah, well, the next time I try to hammer a nail in a wall, I’m just going to try to avoid hitting my thumb again.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  103. The Moonbats sure hate it when their candidate is exposed for the fraud that we all knew he was in the first place. Let’s stick to politics, the reality of it all. I am sick and tired of all this “politics of change” junk. Obama is a corrupt Chicago politician. McCain has faults too. I would just like to make sure which one will bring down the price of gasoline, like the Democrats promised they would do in 2006, and make sure that our troops come home in victory, not defeat. I really don’t want to loose the War on Terrorists. Some Democrats are on the other side of that issue.

    tyree (f48b34)

  104. #96
    love2008 (#91), you didn’t address me, but if I were Obama I would tell my legion of donors to take the money that they would have given me and instead give it to their favorite charity
    Really JVW, you would really do that?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  105. People who pretend that the Bush administration has not been engaging in extensive diplomacy since 9/11 are either astonishingly ignorant or astonishingly dishonest. Or both.

    Actually, if they’re “pretending” then by definition they can’t be ignorant. But I otherwise agree . . . with the caveat that their “diplomacy” appears mostly tone-deaf and undiplomatic to me.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  106. love2008,

    If I were Obama, I hope I would be principled enough to stick to my pledge. I would also encourage my supporters to give money to Democratic-related organizations that can legally support my candidacy. Doing that means Obama might forfeit some donations but IMO it would be the best way to keep his promises while still trying to benefit from his significant support.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  107. Phil, obviously we’ll have to put you in the ignorant camp then.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  108. #76
    Wonderful ideals to seek for in a president. Problem is, such a man does not exist. You would have to seek him outside this world. Here is a politician joke to lighten you up;
    When I have been asked who caused the riots and the killing in L.A., my answer has been direct and simple: Who is to blame for the riots? The rioters are to blame. Who is to blame for the killings? The killers are to blame.”

    — Al Gore

    love2008 (1b037c)

  109. People who pretend that the Bush administration has not been engaging in extensive diplomacy since 9/11 are either astonishingly ignorant or astonishingly dishonest. Or both.

    I made a glib reply in response to Phil, but SPQR hits the nail on the head (couldn’t resist) with this. The Bush Administration currently is engaging in diplomacy with Syria, North Korea, Palestine, Pakistan, (to one degree or another) Iran, and several other countries.

    At what point would Obama finally agree to military intervention? I’ll bet he would say that he supported the formation of the coalition and subsequent invasion of Afghanistan, but is there any record of him saying this before the actual invasion? I seem to recall that many liberals — the type of people that Pres. Obama would bring into his State Department — were warning of the “brutal Afghan winters” and the “battle-hardened” Afghan militias that “fought the Soviets to a draw.” I have long believed that most Democrats only supported the war once it was fait accompli and there was no longer any political leverage to be had from opposing it. They hedged their bets so that, like Iraq, they could later decide what a colossal blunder it had been if it had not gone so well. I just couldn’t see a Gore Administration having the will to use force to remove the Taliban from Afghanistan. They would more likely have bombed the hell out of it, declared victory, and gone on their way.

    To sum up, Phil is correct that you need both force & coercion and communication & diplomacy in your arsenal. I just think it is folly to assume that you can have success with one while seriously downplaying the other.

    JVW (ce519b)

  110. DRJ #106 – If I were Obama, I hope I would be principled enough to stick to my pledge.

    Actually, it really isn’t so much about the pledge for me. It’s that other word – principle, and it’s a recurring theme in the Obama campaign, the reversal on priciples.

    Obama’s principles are purposely announced in the quote “I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests.”

    His retraction isn’t just an abandonment of a pledge, it’s a repudiation of a core principle“the influence of moneyed special interests”, the core principle that his whole campaign is built upon – the notion that he will not be “business as usual” in DC. Of course it’s something we’ve seen before with Wright, etc., but this is a much bigger story than its being made out to be.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  111. Good point, Apogee.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  112. love2008 (#104): Yes really. Imagine the scads of positive PR Obama would reap from such a move. I would curse having ever promised to participate in public funding, but I would honor my commitment and seek the most constructive use of my excess funds, which just happens to reflect positively on my candidacy.

    JVW (ce519b)

  113. #106
    DRJ that is the fundamental difference between you and a politician. There is a big difference between ideals and practicals.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  114. I think there are principled politicians, love2008. Not enough, but there are some.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  115. #114
    I think so too. But do you think it is a lack of principle for Obama to decide not to accept public funding if he believes he doesnt need it? Is it really a moral issue or a question of strategy? I mean, as an unknown quality, Obama needs all the money he can muster to compete against an incumbent party. He needs money for alot of tv ads, and campaigning. When you have to choose between the moral thing to do and the smart thing to do to win, which should you choose?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  116. I agree Obama is treating this as a strategic decision about what’s best for him. It’s also a matter of principle because he’s going back on a promise.

    Being President has those kinds of decisions, too.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  117. PS – I’ve already said what I would do. I’d keep my word.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  118. Is there a way to know when a new post has come into a blog page without having to hit the “refresh” button to find out. DRJ? Anyone know?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  119. love2008 – yes. It’s simple. Set up a separate laptop in another room. Train a cat to constantly hit the refresh button (do this with food) and to meow when the screen changes.

    Sheesh, some people have no technical abilities.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  120. Scott, why did you go and mess up the entire thread with those darn FACTS. Please, I hope we can change for the better. Facts are a distraction. Please pledge to not do that again, and by pledge…I mean plan not to do that again.

    cfbleachers (4040c7)

  121. I’m way late :(

    cue republican indignation! tribal music from those backed by corporations and 527 groups that this upstart dares to take millions of dollars from private citizens after he said he wouldn’t.

    Anyone want to tell ADA (comment 1) how much the democrats (527’s) OUTSPENT the republicans in the last ‘backed by corporations’ election?

    Verlin Martin (9a408b)

  122. Please pledge to not do that again, and by pledge…I mean plan not to do that again.

    If I say that I will agressively pursue options so that I will never do that again…

    Does that mean I have to wait a day before I do it again? :)

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  123. And spoil his innocent little self-delusions, Verlin? I haven’t the heart.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  124. #119
    Sheesh, some people have no technical abilities.
    Which is exactly why I aked Einstein. Could you kindly lend me some of yours, o genuis?

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  125. love2008,

    I can’t help you. The best I can offer is that sometimes I open Patterico.com in two windows so I can refresh one while I read the other.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  126. :)

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  127. Thanks DRJ. Thats exactly what I do too. Was wondering if a new internet technology had come out like we have on yahoo messenger. It beeps when a new text comes in. Thanks anyway. As always DRJ, you are still the best. 😀

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  128. Love, I usually open a tab for each thread, and refresh them as I go…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  129. That would be neat but that’s a lot of beeps. Imagine how loud it would have been during the Kozinski posts.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  130. beeps? Your computer beeps when you click refresh?

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  131. love2008 #124

    Sorry, I would have answered sooner but my mom called and the call waiting kicked off the modem.

    – and it’s not O’Genuis. It’s pronounced O’heinous.

    I don’t know what web browser you use, but if it’s firefox,

    Then go to:
    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/115

    It’s a program that you can tell to automatically update a page every ____ seconds or minutes. Don’t know what that’ll do for commenting…

    It will also upload all your credit card information to my offshore account in the Caymens.

    And Scott Jacobs – haven’t you watched any movies? All computers beep and make high pitched machine sounds when characters appear on the screen. Oh, and you can ask them anything and they’ll give you a direct answer.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  132. If I say that I will agressively pursue options so that I will never do that again…

    Does that mean I have to wait a day before I do it again?

    Well, technically Scott…it depends on what you mean by “a day” and it depends upon what you mean by “wait”.

    cfbleachers (4040c7)

  133. Scott,

    My computer doesn’t beep when I refresh but love2008 said her Yahoo Messenger beeps when a new message comes in. I was imagining what it would be like to have that feature here.

    DRJ (1a5f9b)

  134. eww. That would annoy me greatly…

    And now I think I’m off to try playing with FireFox…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  135. Not like that, you perverts…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  136. Gee, a politician breaks a written campaign promise four-and-a-half months before the election?

    Surprise!

    If you listened to all of the Obama supporters calling Hugh Hewitt’s show today to defend Obama’a lies, then you know that the true believers would still vote for him even if he bit the head off a puppy on-camera. They all used one of two excuses: 1) Bush and/or McCain has lied too — the ‘two wrongs make a right’ or ‘what’s good for the goose …’ excuse. 2) Obama changed his mind — none of them had a comeback when Hugh pointed out that Obama’s ‘change of mind’ was from honoring his pledge to dishonoring it.

    Missed It By THAT Much (8ecfb1)

  137. Missed – read my #110 – I think this is far more than breaking a written campaign promise – it’s an abandonment of the central issue of his entire campaign.

    It’s his admission that it will be business as usual.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  138. #131
    Thanks Apogee. O’heinous? What are you? An evil monster? A flagitious little creature? Scary. :)

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  139. We’re giving Obama too much credit. We shouldn’t expect him to do even the most simple basic human things like not committing bold faced lies. Obama is scum. And we shouldn’t expect anything from scum.

    Roy Mustang (1641ac)

  140. Why are the republicans really worked up about this? Obama declines from a former pledge-plan to accept public financing and everyone is throwing up a fit. Chill out guys. heres one more politician joke to help y’all de-valve a little. <i>Find out who is in control
    At a recent interview, it seems that Bill Clinton broke out in rage after being asked a line of questions about him being controlled.

    Interviewer: “Who pulls your strings, Bill? What special interests control you?”

    Clinton (visibly upset): “You leave Hillary out of this!”

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  141. love2008 – No one’s worked up. No one’s throwing a fit. All that’s happening is Obama has admitted through his actions that the central theme of his campaign – that his candidacy represents a change from the “business as usual” politics – is a lie.

    It’s a shame his central theme (now shown to be a lie) is the single reason his supporters cite as their reason to vote for him in November.

    That reason is now gone.

    However,

    You also cannot expect Obama supporters, who themselves admit that they do not know what his positions or plans are, to notice the “change” in his campaign. His supporters do not notice anything.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  142. “I was for public financing before I was against it.”

    Teflon Dad (b9958c)

  143. “Gee, a politician breaks a written campaign promise four-and-a-half months before the election?”

    Didn’t one of Obama’s incompetant staffers make another written screw up on his behalf in this instance? He hasn’t used that one in a few days.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  144. #142
    “I was for public financing before I was against it.”
    That was waaaaayyyy before I was against it after being for it. :)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  145. I loved Louis L’amour’s Hondo as a kid. At one point, one of the main characters promises a band of Indians that if they allow her to live, she will refuse to tell the cavalry which way they went. The chief agrees, and when she is later pressed, honors her pledge. The Lieutenant objects, saying,

    “You gave your word, yes, but he’s just a savage.”

    She coldly replies,

    ” But, Lieutenant, it was MY word.”

    (recalled from an admittedly poor memory)

    Her changed circumstances meant nothing to her.

    My views are simple:
    1. Although I don’t support the man, if he wins, he will be my president too. I have a right to be concerned as to his honesty.
    2. Pragmatic answers are insufficient to rebut arguments over principle.
    3. Tu quoque is the first refuge of scoundrels.
    4. Since this was inevitable, I am so glad it happened to John McCain, of all people.

    OTOH, if Obama wins, I sure hope he is lying about some of his plans.

    fat tony (601b8d)

  146. Here’s what I would like to see an Obama supporter write/admit on this issue:

    Winning the WH is the paramount issue, overriding all matters of principle. Having the levers of the authority over the Exec. Branch is so important to them that no public policy, no matter how important, cannot be sacraficed in pursuit of the electoral victory.

    That’s really what Obama’s decision says about him. He has long favored public financing of elections — with the unspoken caveat being that such support would be withdrawn if the public financing would deprive him of a perceived tactical advantage.

    Winning in November is elevated over character and principle.

    Just admit it.

    wls (0ee728)

  147. You have to love the irony of a socialist rejecting government funds in favor of private funds.

    Roy Mustang (1641ac)

  148. Would you really give up all that just because you dont want some people (who by the way wont ever support you no matter what you do) to be offended and call you a liar? or would you do what you would need to do to win? Honestly wls, what would you do?
    Comment by love2008 — 6/19/2008 @ 4:44 pm

    When you have to choose between the moral thing to do and the smart thing to do to win, which should you choose?

    Comment by love2008 — 6/19/2008 @ 5:54 pm

    Late to the party here, but the fact that it seems OK to do something immoral (go back on one’s promise, pledge, word, for personal benefit) would be troubling if it weren’t such a common attitude among people today. Mostly the liberals that I’ve encountered, but maybe that’s unfair to generalize.

    The first question is bafflingly worded though. See, I wouldn’t “give up all that” (i.e. lotsa money for ME) because “I don’t want my opponents calling me a liar.” I’d “give up all that” because I don’t want to BE a liar: I want to be honest and keep my promises.

    That’s a huge difference, and the fact that a desire to be moral and honest (as opposed to appearing so) isn’t a priority for some people is really troubling (and also fairly commonplace unfortunately). We can’t change all of them, but we can pick our elected officials who have lotsa power over us. As DRJ and others said, when it benefits him in the future, we can expect Obama to turn his back on principle, and the people he committed it to, yet again. This is not a quality I want in a leader of the free world. Get it away!

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  149. Racists. None of this is anything other than a distraction, and does not help to keep fresh fruit in their home.

    JD (5f0e11)

  150. Whats the deal with “keeping fresh fruit in their home”, JD? Am I missing something here?

    love2008 (0c8c2c)

  151. cue republican indignation! tribal music from those backed by corporations and 527 groups that this upstart dares to take millions of dollars from private citizens after he said he wouldn’t. does anybody else care? more small violins needed for the string section.

    Yeah, right.

    First, MoveOn.org has already launched some incredibly dishonest ads targeted at McCain, so Democrats are living in glass houses as far as 527s are concerned.

    Second, I remember when Bush ran in 2000 without taking federal funds, and was immediately labeled beholden to special interests. And when Steve Forbes used his own money to run, he was accused of trying to buy the Presidency.

    So, let’s stow the sarcasm, because the Dems have earned the criticism today.

    Steverino (b42fd7)

  152. Whats the deal with “keeping fresh fruit in their home”, JD? Am I missing something here?

    A short while back (I’d have to dig, but I think the comment was blogged about here), Michelle Obama made a comment about how hard it was a short time ago to make ends meet – they have only recently paid off their college loans, they had $10,000 spend on each kid (or was that the total for the two?) for activities that really hurt their way of life…

    And she said that she’d even found it hard to keep fresh fruit around for the kids to eat…

    So the couple making an easy 6-digit income (I would guess around the 180k mark, of not over 200k) was “struggling” and “knew our pain”…

    And thus was born the mockings…

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  153. #31
    You are a heartbreaker

    My Ex-Fiance started sleeping around until I found out, in the hopes I would end the engagement…

    I might still be a tad bit bitter about that…
    Hey Scotty, I never really took you on your philandering, ex-fiance. It must be really hard for you. What was the problem? Wasnt she getting enough of it from big ol’ Scotty? :)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  154. *chuckles*

    Apparently not. Living a few hours apart had something to do with it… 😉

    Eh, I act all bitter and angry, but that’s only because I am. 😀

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  155. #154
    *..sigh..*…women. Very hard to please these days.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  156. *shrugs*

    S’ok… She was more than slightly nuts, so frankly, in the end, she ended up with some STD, and I was free of a loony sharing my last name.

    I came out ahead, I’m thinking. :)

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  157. #156
    Yeah. You came out ahead. But I sense you still habour some feelings for her notwithstanding. Though on the brighter side, you got spared of an infection. But does that really take away the pain? Sometimes the heart can be so treacherous. =[

    love2008 (1b037c)

  158. #137 – Apogee

    Well said, but I’m still trying to figure out why anybody ever fell for this line that he wasn’t about politics as usual. He rose up through the ‘Chicago machine’ fer chrissake! If you don’t play politics as usual there, nobody even learns your name.

    My mom grew up on the south side, in a German-American neighborhood, and she tells of having Democratic precinct leaders come to her apartment door offering to take care of any “problems” she had in exchange for her promise to vote for JFK.

    Far from being comething new, Obama is simply following in the tradition of his adopted city.

    Missed It By THAT Much (d55d4c)

  159. But I sense you still habour some feelings for her notwithstanding.

    Well, I’d like to stand at the edge of the well she just fell into and laugh…

    Does that count? :)

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  160. I thinks Phil’s ” he may have said it was a pledge but he meant something else” has to be the best comment.

    JD (5f0e11)

  161. Missed it #158 – She may have not known it, but your mom voted for Kennedy anyway.

    We never fell for this line, but many people bought the speeches. Expect the media to go into overdrive to cover this complete abdication of principle.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  162. You , you killed her? Thats not good Scotty. But then, who cares. She had it coming didnt she? I am throwing a can of beer into that well in memory of a *&%&@#, that once was. :)

    love2008 (1b037c)

  163. No, I said I would like to look down and laugh… Not that I did, and she’s not worth the possible trouble to help her into said well…

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  164. I know Scotty, i know. Kinda prefered the first version though.

    love2008 (0c8c2c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5816 secs.