More Change From Obama...NOT!! - Page 5

EvilMonkey · 06-19-2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

But I am honsetly wondering how anyone can "control "527's.
If you show me how - i'll be down with Obama's premise.

All anyone supporting our nominee needs to know is that by declining public funding he is getting the upper hand on McCain, why do you think McCain and the republicans are freaking out about it?

Would you have Obama agree to something that is going to hurt him in the GE? I don't care what he said or signed, if it's not binding they can go to hell.

winthrop · 06-19-2008, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

That is WAY old Dept. of Energy data.

Old does not necessarily mean wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

In short; we don't know what what the reserves are until we actually do some exploration.
We need to drill more here, and stop spending so much $$ to the mideast

I agree, but drilling off the coast or in ANWR is short term thinking
without short term results. We need, have needed to for thirty five
years, to launch a serious program to find/develop alternate sources
of energy in the long term. Electing presidents in the rect--er--pocket
of Big Oil is going to help that happen never.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

Here's the kicker.
China has contracted with Cuba to do side drilling off Key west ( within 60 miles)

I sure as hell don't want China taking our reserves, nor do I trust them to have the same type of enviornmental safeguards we use.

How can China contract with Cuba to drill off Key West?

Curator · 06-20-2008, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericgtr

All anyone supporting our nominee needs to know is that by declining public funding he is getting the upper hand on McCain, why do you think McCain and the republicans are freaking out about it?

Would you have Obama agree to something that is going to hurt him in the GE? I don't care what he said or signed, if it's not binding they can go to hell.

I agree. To be sure, Obama reversed course. He said he intended to stay within the system, and then he didn’t, so if his detractors want to shout, “Flip-flop!” it’s a reasonable enough charge. But if policy reversals are a politician’s biggest crime, John McCain might as well drop out of the race now.

Obama isn’t violating any laws or doing anything unethical here — and maximize his chances of success. In this case, that means raising lots of money from his supporters. And this is scandalous … why?

The stakes are too high, and the responsibilities are too great. In this context, if that means withdrawing from a flawed campaign-finance system, so be it.

EvilMonkey · 06-20-2008, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curator

I agree. To be sure, Obama reversed course. He said he intended to stay within the system, and then he didn’t, so if his detractors want to shout, “Flip-flop!” it’s a reasonable enough charge. But if policy reversals are a politician’s biggest crime, John McCain might as well drop out of the race now.

Obama isn’t violating any laws or doing anything unethical here — and maximize his chances of success. In this case, that means raising lots of money from his supporters. And this is scandalous … why?

The stakes are too high, and the responsibilities are too great. In this context, if that means withdrawing from a flawed campaign-finance system, so be it.

Well, it's a risk but one worth taking. We will have to watch the polls to see how much of a hit he will take from it, if any. The flip side is that the 527's can spend as much money as they damned well like and if Obama is strapped to the 80+ million he will not have the resources to fight back, we all know how well that turned out for Kerry.

To me, winning is more important than an ethical stance on this issue. He did agree to it and is now backing out which is something we rarely see from him but the alternative of having no ability to combat the swiftboats could prove far more damaging. It's no wonder the republicans are so freaked out by it, he is out raising McCain 3 to 1 easily. IMO it's the right decision.

CosmicRocker · 06-20-2008, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curator

I agree. To be sure, Obama reversed course. He said he intended to stay within the system, and then he didn’t, so if his detractors want to shout, “Flip-flop!” it’s a reasonable enough charge. But if policy reversals are a politician’s biggest crime, John McCain might as well drop out of the race now.

Obama isn’t violating any laws or doing anything unethical here — and maximize his chances of success. In this case, that means raising lots of money from his supporters. And this is scandalous … why?

The stakes are too high, and the responsibilities are too great. In this context, if that means withdrawing from a flawed campaign-finance system, so be it.

It's a flip flop. so what? he's doing the politically expediant thing.
He would be a fool to do otherwise.

ibex · 06-20-2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

It's a flip flop. so what? he's doing the politically expediant thing.
He would be a fool to do otherwise.

Again, McLame can play the part of the pious pauper all the while allowing the 527s to do the dirty work. Obama had no choice and McLame's reaction to all this reminds me of Claude Raines in "Cassablanca" (shocked, shocked, shocked!). It's bullshit, but the stupid portion of the electorate will eat up McLame's righteous indignation like there's no tomorrow. Obama makes a flip flop? Sure, but Grandpa Munster only agreed to public funding back when the Straight Talk Express had four flat tires and was out of gas. As soon as he aced out all the other elephants, he went right back to the lobbying trough like the pig that he is. In other words, flip flop flip flop flip flop..............

So he'll end up slipping on one of these.

CosmicRocker · 06-20-2008, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ibex

Again, McLame can play the part of the pious pauper all the while allowing the 527s to do the dirty work. Obama had no choice and McLame's reaction to all this reminds me of Claude Raines in "Cassablanca" (shocked, shocked, shocked!). It's bullshit, but the stupid portion of the electorate will eat up McLame's righteous indignation like there's no tomorrow. Obama makes a flip flop? Sure, but Grandpa Munster only agreed to public funding back when the Straight Talk Express had four flat tires and was out of gas. As soon as he aced out all the other elephants, he went right back to the lobbying trough like the pig that he is. In other words, flip flop flip flop flip flop..............

So he'll end up slipping on one of these.

agreed.

The public looks at this as a non-issue.
For many years the Rep's outraised the Dem's.
Was there any talk about " fairness" then?

Go for it - press every advantage you can.
politics ain't beanbag.

julia · 06-20-2008, 12:10 PM

Obama said he would try to reach an agreement with the Rep nom on Public Financing.

In the current Federal Public financing legislation, added by Mac, travel on family jets are exempt.

It's a very flawed piece of legislation.

guest1234567 · 06-20-2008, 12:28 PM

I'm very disappointed in all of you who have complained about ethics in government and politicians, but think that breaking a promise is ok if the ends justify the needs. More specifically if the ends justify YOUR needs.

This is why Dems lose. They have proven time and time again that they have no backbone when the going gets tough and that they also will take political expediency over ethics the same as Republicans.

Quote:

In November 2007, Obama answered "Yes" to Common Cause when asked "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?"

Quote:

Obama wrote: 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 (DWI)
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.

Political Punch

http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7...NALRELEASE.PDF

julia · 06-20-2008, 12:34 PM

Guest, McCain has not agreed to forgo private funding.

From your post:

Quote:

In November 2007, Obama answered "Yes" to Common Cause when asked "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?

06-20-2008, 12:10 PM	#48 (permalink)
julia Sassy Lipstick Maverick Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 3,795 Blog Entries: 7 Thanks: 271 Thanked 272 Times in 164 Posts	Obama said he would try to reach an agreement with the Rep nom on Public Financing. In the current Federal Public financing legislation, added by Mac, travel on family jets are exempt. It's a very flawed piece of legislation.
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode