Obama insisted that other candidates adhere to campaign spending limits -- but he has been raising cash like they don't apply. Seems a wee bit hypocritical to me. And he is getting hammered for it.

Hammering Senator Barack Obama for a fourth straight day, Senator John McCain said here on Friday that he expects Senator Obama to abide by his pledge use public financing for his general election if Mr. McCain does so as well.

“It was very clear to me that Senator Obama had agreed to having public financing of the general election campaign if I did the same thing,” he said after a town hall meeting here. “I made the commitment to the American people that if I was the nominee of my party, I would go the route of public financing. I expect Senator Obama to keep his word to the American people as well.”

Asked if he would use public financing even if Mr. Obama did not, he said: “If Senator Obama goes back on his commitment to the American people, then obviously we have to rethink our position. Our whole agreement was we would take public financing if he made that commitment as well. And he signed a piece of paper, I’m told, that made that commitment.”

Mr. Obama did not rule out the possibility of accepting public financing, but declared on Friday, “I’m not the nominee yet.”

“If I am the nominee, I will make sure our people talk to John McCain’s people to find out if we are willing to abide by the same rules and regulations with respect to the general election going forward,” Mr. Obama told reporters at a news conference in Milwaukee. “It would be presumptuous of me to start saying now that I am locking into something when I don’t even know if the other side will agree to it.”

Actually, at this point Senator Obama DOES know who the GOP niminee will be, and he has agreed to abide by the spending limits, so his refusal to commit is disingenuous.

Especially since his campaign is claiming that Barack Obama has never ACTUALLY committed to public financing.

“Obama is not the nominee, but this is a question we will address when he is," campaign spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement Thursday. Burton rejected the idea that Obama was trying to have it both ways on the issue.

The context here is important. Obama made his original comments when his campaign was just getting started and his fundraising ability was largely unknown. Obama has since emerged as a record-setting fundraiser who likely would eclipse the $85 million public financing limit.

In other words, that commitment was back when he didn't know if he could raise much more then the spending limit -- but now that he sees he can, he doesn't consider what he said to be binding. Seems like the "candidate of change" is really the "candidate of change his mind".

And the Washington Post offers this observation.

But this kind of backtracking and parsing isn't what the millions of voters who have been inspired by Mr. Obama are looking for. It's not befitting Mr. Obama's well-earned image as a champion of reform. Instead of waffling, Mr. Obama should be pushing Ms. Clinton to go beyond her spokesman's statements that she would "definitely consider" forgoing public financing.

Why not let the candidates raise as much cash as they can and save the taxpayers' money? Because it's better for voters if candidates spend more time talking to them and less time cozying up to donors. It's better for democracy if candidates are less indebted to big bundlers who have raked in six- or seven-figure amounts for their campaigns. Mr. McCain seems to understand this. What about the Democrats?

Now I personally disagree with the whole premise of Political Speech And participation Limitation Laws like those supported by the liberal media, John McCain, and, supposedly, the Democrats. I believe it is better for the American people and the American political system if individuals (not corporations or unions, but individuals) are permitted to freely speak and donate money to campaigns without limits. I believe that it is better if candidates and campaigns and political parties are not muzzled by spending limits. And I believe that this piece in today's Washington Post makes a compelling case that such laws are inimical to the First Amendment. But if Barack Obama is going to argue that clean politics require the suppression of political speech and participation, he ought to bind himself to that regime right now.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Adeline and Hazel, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Faultline USA, Nuke Gingrich, , The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, CORSARI D'ITALIA, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 06:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 839 words, total size 7 kb.