by Damozel | Like most Dems, I think Obama made the right call when he decided not to accept public funding. If anything, the furious gyrations of Republican bloggers proves that this is so. And John Kerry points out that lack of funds hampered him in his ability to respond to the Swiftboat attacks. The Obama campaign explains the decision in an email sent from David
Plouffe. In it, the campaign says that even though they could have had
$80 million in taxpayer funding, 'the system has been so gamed and exploited by
our opponents that it is effectively broken.' Right. Let 'em eat PACs.
At The Caucus, Sarah Wheaton wrote: 'The liberal blogosphere’s reaction to Senator Barack Obama’s decision to opt out of public financing can be summed up in the one-word opening line of...Markos Moulitsas Zuniga: “Good.” Marc Ambinder says: 'The potential money gap in the general election is huge -- Obama could raise as much as $300m, and the McCain campaign/RNC budget team doesn't anticipating spending more than $150m.'
Here at BN-Politics we noticed some time ago that Obama sometimes has made statements which are --- how can I put this? --- let's say, 'slightly out of synch with the facts.' His recent characterization of his statements on NAFTA during the primaries as 'overheated rhetoric,' and his support of John Barrow ---so distressing to my fellow progressives --- surprise us not at all. .
And for me --- I speak only for myself --- there is a certain savage pleasure in being one up on the GOP. I naturally don't care if he reneged on a promise to the GOP's candidate.
At Open Left, Chris Bowers more circumspectly expresses a similar view regarding the weight to be given to an 'abstract ethical principle' when balanced against an overwhelming advantage. .
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....
Bowers also points out that McCain's response has impaled him on the horns of a dilemma. McCain said, 'Barack Obama has revealed himself to be just another typical politician who will do and say whatever is most expedient for Barack Obama.'
[N]ow either McCain takes public financing, and faces a huge monetary deficit as a result, or McCain goes the private route too, and becomes "another typical politician," just like Obama. (Open Left)
Which way will he go, do you think? Will he stand on principle or will he cynically do what's necessary to win? Does anyone really think the answer's in doubt?
Andrew Sullivan also approves Obama's decision to take a short-term hit to score a long-term goal.
At The Huffington Post, Nick Nyhart considers the decision 'regrettable' but understandable, given 'the major shortcomings of the 30-year-old system and the failure of Congress to fix the badly broken system in recent years.'
Chris Cizzilla at The Fix 'parses out' Obama's reasoning. While acknowledging the advantage to Obama, he also warns of a potential danger.
For Obama, the decision was something close to a no-brainer. The possibility for a huge cash edge over your opponent -- especially when Obama's team believes strongly that it can expand the traditional November playing field -- is just too hard to pass up, no matter the hit he will take in the short term on the choice.
For McCain, Obama's opting out presents opportunity -- the opportunity to snatch back the reform mantle from a candidate who until now has been able to embody the sort of change that the American public is itching for.
The only certain outcome of this decision is that the public financing system, in place since the post-Watergate reforms in the mid 1970s, is now dead and buried. Obama's labeling of the system as "broken" means that a precedent has been set for other candidates down the line. Pandora's box is open and it isn't going to be shut.
Steve Benen points out at Crooks and Liars why it's the best choice for Obama.
I think Barack Obama made the right call this morning by announcing that he would not stay within the public financing system for the general election.... Obama will be able to take full advantage of his fundraising edge over McCain, and compete aggressively everywhere.
Republicans seem to think that Obama has broken a campaign promise he made to them. They ain't happy.
Trevor Potter, McCain's spokesman is moaning that Obama pledged to '“aggressively pursue an
agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed
general election,” [but] had never engaged in real negotiations on the issue.' (The Caucus)
Yeah, that'll bring tears to the eyes of Dems everywhere --- of laughter. It's like, 'Do you think Democrat owes you a level playing field? The Democrat doesn't owe you a level playing field.'
At Swampland, Ana Marie Cox discusses this.
Obviously, the McCain camp is angry because they've just lost one of things that they hoped might level the playing field. Obama's spending advantage will be enormous. So they want to make what political point they can with the move, pushing a narrative that Obama is unprincipled and cynical. But is what he did so bad?...
It's as if Kobe Bryant agreed to play Kevin Garnett as long as they both had one had tied behind their back and then, when Garnett said "yes," changed his mind. Fans of Bryant would probably cheer the decision, and point out that league rules don't require anyone to play with one hand tied behind his back, and, in fact, Garnett is himself breaking the hands-behind-the-back agreement because he has secured only his elbow, leaving his lower arm free.
On the same theme, Ron Chusid remarks at Liberal Values:
The Republican National Committee, along with many conservative blogs, are attacking Obama for deciding against accepting federal matching funds. They don’t mention the fact that Obama never agreed to accept them if the Republicans failed to cooperate in fixing the problems in the system which benefit them.
The leads to quite a reversal philosophically. It is now the Republicans who make government funding the ideal, while they attack a privately-funded opponent. The transformation of the Republicans as the party of big government, which has progressed throughout Bush’s years in office, is now complete.
The Gun-Toting Liberal doesn't like public campaign financing anyway.
Not because it is a bad idea, but because it excludes the average, ordinary Americans who claim to be “independent” voters who do not subscribe completely to either of the two major parties who are exclusively entitled to this funding. Open up this public money to a few other parties, keep it even, and I’ll CAMPAIGN on behalf of it. ‘Til then, KUDOS to Obama (no matter the self-serving reasons behind it, I just want my tax money left alone) and shame on McCain, and shame on BOTH of their
partiescartels for hijacking the Democratic Republic of our Founding Fathers for personal and political gain.
Lots more discussion at Memeorandum!
RECENT BN-POLITICS POSTINGS
Progressives Let Down with a Loud, Sickening Thud?: A Buck Naked Bloggerama
Muslim Women Accept Obama's Apology
Obama Endorses White Conservative over Black Liberal
Muslim Women Barred by Obama Campaign from Photograph
Unity? Not for Most of the Crowd on This Video
People are really trying to convince themselves that a falsehood is truth. Obama conveniently states that any issue in question is either a misdirection from the issues or the system is broken. If anyone remembers CREEP and exactly why we have public financing knows that this is the political game of buying the election. Don't give me the 527 hype. Obama claims if the other candidates "could reign" in the 527's? 527's are independent of the candidate and by law they can't "reign them in". This is similar to his position that he doesn't take money from big oil companies failing to mention that it is illegal to do so. The blogs are full of calls for dems who are maxed out on the Obama contributions to now contribute to those 527s.
His whole mantra of not taking money from lobbyists is a shell game and a con. He does the republicans proud with his ethics and tactics.
Posted by: Linda C. | June 20, 2008 at 10:10 AM