Gold. Pure comedy gold. I LOVE the twisting of honor and logic in the attempt to keep the halo on your guy. Maybe you should join Cirque de Soleil.
Hell, if Obama had tossed away his advantage, half you guys would be saying that he’s too much of a wussy, afraid to get down and fight, an idealistic moonbat who can’t grasp the practical, hard-headed reality of politics.
(I don’t mean principled people like you, Mag, who are compelled by strict standards of honor and honesty. No, I mean partisan guys…)
Please tell me that’s not true!
I was starting to believe that Willie Horton and Swift Boat ads were the epitomy of evil.
Not me. Seriously. I would have admired it. The same way I truly admire the stances taken by Ralph Nader over the years. I don’t agree with a lot of his politics, but I think he’s one of the most honorable men in politics.
I’m glad you see that great distinction… Maybe I was wrong about you.
For the record, I said “maybe”. 
Wasn’t the Willie Horton ad run by the Bush campaign itself, not some outside group?
Well, you can’t just take the Swift Boaters out of the equation, say Kerry would’ve won, and then claim that was the key swing issue. Swift Boaters were the most notorious, but that doesn’t mean they had the biggest influence. In fact, the intense scrutiny they got could have made them the least influential.
What part? The Cleland part? Unfortunate, but true. Something else?
Sorta. Cleland’s injury resulted from an accident caused by a fellow soldier, therefore not a direct result of enemy action. A technicality, in my view, unless, for instance, soldiers injured by misdirected artillery should somehow be denied some extra measure of recognition.
Just guessing here, but he’d probably rather have his legs back than be President.
McCain was trying to get out of it before Obama made this decision. As noted he was kind of stuck because he had benefited from the public financing in a few ways already.
Obama’s people met with McCain’s people to hammer out some sort of agreement…as he said he would. They obviously failed to come to an arrangement. I have no idea where the talks broke down but I’d be willing to bet it had to do with 527 ads. While the candidates cannot outright prevent 527s from doing their thing they can lean on them and McCain has already shown an unwillingness to do that.
And as for “public financing” Obama’s fundraising, as noted before, is about as pure a method of public funds as you can get. The vast majority of his warchest has been filled by individual donations of less than $100 each (on average). If all his money had come from lobbyists and corporations you’d have a better point.
I do not remember the specifics around Willie Horton enough to say but Swift Boat was pretty thoroughly debunked. Didn’t stop it from gaining traction anyway (greater in measure but akin to Obama being a Muslim).
(Not sure we should get into it in this thread but see Swift Vets and POWs for Truth for more)
No. It was run by an NSPAC, called “Americans for Bush”, and ran as an independent expenditure. (See Buckley v. Valeo, 1976, US Supreme Court.)
Ahh, so you have the talking points down well. So, he’s only a lying pol if ALL his money comes from big donors. The GOLD gets GOLDER!!! 24 carat, baby!
And you have all the smoke and mirrors down so we’re even. The SMOKE gets SMOKIER!!! 100% soot, baby!
And you know what else? Most of Obama’s money is in small donations! Well, sure, that sounds good if you spin it right, but that means his money is coming from poor people, doesn’t it? People who can’t afford the buy-in of $2,500, like a real American. And here he pretends he’s all about caring for the “little guy”, when he’s bleeding poor people for his campaign!
Not McBomb, no siree, Bob! John takes his campaign money from rich folks and corporations, who can afford it, won’t see him squeezing money from widows and orphans like Obama.
You know, 20% of Obama’s donations are in food stamps. That’s a true fact, you could look it up.
How about the mirrors? Don’t they get mirrorier? Stick to your day job, chum: Obama Apologist.
Jeeze, it was not so long ago the guy actually stood for something. And he can still straighten this out. But at least you can say you stood up for him when he was in the wrong. Good for you. You’re a Champion!
You know, it is sad, even for me, this reality check. I like having principled people around. I guess we’re back to Nader.
I probably should not have responded to your mudslinging with more mudslinging.
If you want to go tit-for-tat on character and principles between Obama and McCain I’ll go for it any day. There was a time (up till the 2000 election) where I viewed McCain as a principled man and I loved him calling bullshit when he saw it (if he had won the nomination then I would have voted for him over Gore). Since then he has caved in a way so profound I am shocked and more than a little disappointed.
McCain gave great service to this country but he has lost whatever spark once drove him and has capitulated and prostituted himself these last few years to achieve the presidency.
If all you’ve got is Obama backtracking on one point it only shows your desperation.
Yeah, it sounded to me too like Obama was in for the public financing. The realities of his position now changed that and he made the smart move. Makes him a politician (surprise) and maybe some of the shine gets tarnished for it. But the upside for him is bigger than the downside. Compare that to McCain reversing himself on so many issues I have actually lost track.
Obama is golden in comparison even if he is mere silver in reality.
Wow. We actually agree in large part. I’m no huge fan of McCain, that’s for sure. And I’m far from happy about him being the Republican nominee. Yes, he has changed positions over the years. But he does have a lot of years in service, and out of the people with similar tenure, I think he’s walked the walk more than any other person in either house. The problem with BO is that he claimed to set himself so far to the side of every other politician. He was different. He rejected the usual way of doing things. He was change incarnate. Those were claims, claims that many on the left lapped up. We see now that he is not the principled idealist he portrayed himself to be. He’s just another politician wiling to trade his beliefs (real or supposed) for a bucket of cash in a quest for more power. I really am sad about it. While I don’t agree with his politics, I like their being people like that. Like Nader, who I have immense respect for. I wish we had more men like him, on both sides. So we are where we are with every election. Two flawed mortals with different ideologies. So let them both be evaluated on the soundness of their positions on the issues. I heartily welcome the comparison. As I guess you do. Let the games begin!
He gets a bucket of cash no matter what, just like McCain. The only question is whether the bucket is built by government bureaucrats or grassroots volunteers. Imagine the Republican spin had Obama rejected his campaign donations in favor of federal loot:
He doesn’t even care about the little people who have supported him! He claimed he was Jesus Christ, and yet he grabs federal cash and spurns the wishes of the people! He’s just another politician willing to deal with the fatcats in Washington instead of the people he says he cares about!
The point is that if you can’t point out a specific ethics violation — especially when contrasted with McCain who tried but failed to do the same thing — then whatever you’re saying is nothing more than gratuitous spin.
I expect two flawed humans who can’t live the ideal 100%. In this case I find Obama’s explanation pretty understandable. You can institute real change when parties cooperate or you have the clout to leverage them into cooperating. He’s trying to address the reality of the situation rather than just rhetoric and appearence. Not an easy task in the political arena in which selling perseption over reality is the norm.
So far when it somes to which candidate is doing the most to adhere to his principles {aside from the spin} I think Obama wins by a good bit. It’s the McCain of the last year or so that is running for president not the McCain of five to 10 years ago. His willingness to change long held positions for political support these last months puts his principles in serious doubt for me. He reminds me too much of our current president who said a lot while campaigning and then betrayed his words when elected.
Here is what Obama-supporting, Democratic political analist Mark Shields had to say on PBS’s News Hour yesterday:
I’m not seeing a lot of Obama-supporting, Democratic analysts coming down on his side on this issue.
Does that mean Pat Tillman is going to loose his purple heart?