• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Obama's Switcheroo

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
http://online.wsj.com/article/...tml?mod=googlenews_wsj

Barack Obama declared this week that he has created a "parallel public financing system." Come again? Let him explain: Under parallel public financing, "the American people decide if they want to support a campaign, they can get on the Internet and finance it."

Up to this moment, "public" financing has meant taking money from the federal government for the general Presidential election. Senator Obama's new system is public, because "the public" sends him the money.


Here's the translation: In November, Mr. Obama said he would accept public financing for the general campaign if John McCain committed to public funds. Now he doesn't want to be tied down by the spending limits attached to public funds. This is embarrassing. Solution: Call his Internet contributors a "parallel public financing" system.
What he is proposing sounds pretty much like what the system would look like if campaign-finance restrictions didn't exist. But they do exist, thanks to reformers like him. Shortly after the candidate made his remarks, a spokesman hurried to say it "was not a policy statement," but merely a description of the nature of his donor base. Barack Obama raised $40 million in the month of March ? twice the $20 million Hillary Clinton's campaign took in. His totals are now more than $230 million.

Good for him. But Mr. Obama is unmistakably talking about abandoning the virtuous world that campaign finance reformers have in mind. The reformers' agenda has always been to limit "the influence of money" in politics, and do so by capping the amount candidates can spend. This naturally appealed to Mr. Obama when he was the underdog. But now that he's top dog, standing on principle isn't as appealing as the prospect of a colossal war chest.

Mr. Obama has also made much of his campaign's pledge not to accept money from political action committees, raising the majority of his funds from small private donations. PACs typically make up less than 1% of overall election donations to Presidential candidates, so that's no sacrifice.

Industry PACs may not give directly to his campaign, but employees of industries may do so, and many of his contributors have come from executives and their spouses. For example, Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks fundraising in elections, Mr. Obama has received $528,765 from people in the pharmaceutical industry and $1,380,108 from commercial banks. He comes in second to Mrs. Clinton in donations from lawyers with $13,690,170, just over a million shy of her total.

There is in fact a real parallel financing system already in place and ready to support Mr. Obama. It's called George Soros and so-called 527 groups such as the Democrat-supporting Fund for America or the newly named Progressive Media USA. Progressive Media recently announced plans for a $40 million, four-month campaign against Mr. McCain, and that's only one group in the game.

Mr. Obama once said he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." Mr. McCain has already taken steps toward public financing in the general election. So now Mr. Obama wants to preserve his reputation as a reformer while exploiting his new financial advantage. We are all beginning to learn how expansive the meaning of "change" is.




It seems Barak is being creative in finding ways to get around his promises about Public Funds and PACs. Being a campaign reformer must've sounded like a good idea until it started to work against him.

Also, looks like George Soros is gearing up a serious smear machine against McCain. This should be right in line with Obama's higher ground message of a new kind of politics.


 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,086
493
126
Banks and Lawyers + Big Pharma. This guy is clearly a different kind of candidate :D

btw I just love how much money comes from big law on the democratic side. An industry that litigated out around 250 billion in 2006. At 30-40% of the winnings that is a lot of cash into the hands of big law. I think they could give big oil a run for their money.

 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
A move worthy of a Clinton :) Only a putz would handicap himself in the general election by holding to what he said a year ago when it looked like he had zero shot at the office. Now that he is the largest fundraiser of all time, it would be suicidal to throw away such a huge advantage. What he should say is "I said that last year, and I made a mistake. Unforeseen circumstances blah blah blah Holy Hell am I RICH!"

Is it rationalizing, calculating, major spin and backpedalling? You bet, welcome to politics Obama :thumbsup: Now drop the holier than thou act and they won't be able to nail you as a hypocrite
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,449
21,380
136
Pretty much he's pulling a fast one with the money issue. I would probably do the same thing if I were him, but it is definitely shady. I guess when he made that original statement he didn't realize that he would be raising $40-60 million a month compared to McCains $12-15. He'd be crazy to give up such a massive advantage.

What's not being noted here though is that Obama has raised less from the traditional bulwarks of Democratic campaign financing then Hillary has, while raising far far more money total. This means that those old sources really have comprised a much smaller part of his fundraising base then in the past. Also, RY62, what do you expect Obama to do to stop people not affiliated with his campaign from running those sorts of ads? The only reason I fault Bush for the swift boat ads was that he refused to condemn them, and that people on his campaign were actively working for them at the same time.
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Pretty much he's pulling a fast one with the money issue. I would probably do the same thing if I were him, but it is definitely shady. I guess when he made that original statement he didn't realize that he would be raising $40-60 million a month compared to McCains $12-15. He'd be crazy to give up such a massive advantage.

What's not being noted here though is that Obama has raised less from the traditional bulwarks of Democratic campaign financing then Hillary has, while raising far far more money total. This means that those old sources really have comprised a much smaller part of his fundraising base then in the past. Also, RY62, what do you expect Obama to do to stop people not affiliated with his campaign from running those sorts of ads? The only reason I fault Bush for the swift boat ads was that he refused to condemn them, and that people on his campaign were actively working for them at the same time.
Keeping in line with his message, I would expect him to be very vocal in condemnation of any kind of smear campaign against his opponent.
Americans will be watching to see if there are any ties between the Obama campaign and groups like Progressive Media.
 

craftech

Senior member
Nov 26, 2000
779
4
81
The New York Times, Newsweek, as well as most of the news networks are guilty of perpetrating this lie.

The reference has been to a questionnaire generated by the Midwest Democracy Network:

http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-srv%2Fpolitics%2Fcontent%2FQuestionnaire_Midwest_Democracy_Network_Obama_02192008.pdf

"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's answer? A check next to the box marked "yes." Underneath, the Illinois senator elaborated:

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. "

John McCain did not fill out the questionaire as noted on the website of the Midwest Democracy Network the very people who generated the questionaire.

From their website:
http://www.midwestdemocracynet...f49e208e68c42461664058
"Despite repeated efforts by the MDN and allied civic groups last fall to persuade all the presidential candidates to lay out for the American people their ideas for strengthening the political system, only former Senator John Edwards and Senator Obama chose to do so; their full and unedited responses to the questionnaire were publicly released on November 27, 2007. "

John McCain has gotten a free pass on this because the news media has not reported that
McCain may not be able to opt out of the public financing system for the primary campaign after signing an agreement in November for a loan for his campaign, which could have required him to remain in the race, regardless of whether his candidacy was viable, in order to receive matching funds to pay back the loan. He did that when he was in financial trouble.
The Loan agreement:
http%3A%2F%2Fimages.nictusa.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Ffecimg%2F%3F_28039612468%2B4
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2007/20071207cert.shtml The FEC approved the matching funds with conditions that would require that McCain stay in the race even if he were losing

McCain sent a letter to the FEC trying to get out of it once private contributions started coming in. Chairman David Mason, in a letter to McCain said the all-but-certain Republican nominee needs to assure the commission that he did not use the promise of public money to help secure a $4 million line of credit he obtained in November." by trying to scam the FEC.
Here is the letter:
http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fec.gov%2Fpress%2Fpress2008%2FFECtoMcCain.PDF
Knowingly violating the spending limit is a criminal offense that could put McCain at risk of stiff fines and up to five years in prison. He has already gotten more than the limit but the networks cover up for him.

Unfortunately the news media still follows a pattern of smearing Obama with this hoax and letting McCain get away with what he is doing by not reporting it. One of the many examples of why the news media determines the elections and not the unwitting public.

John
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: craftech
The New York Times, Newsweek, as well as most of the news networks are guilty of perpetrating this lie.

The reference has been to a questionnaire generated by the Midwest Democracy Network:

http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-srv%2Fpolitics%2Fcontent%2FQuestionnaire_Midwest_Democracy_Network_Obama_02192008.pdf

"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's answer? A check next to the box marked "yes." Underneath, the Illinois senator elaborated:

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. "

John McCain did not fill out the questionaire as noted on the website of the Midwest Democracy Network the very people who generated the questionairre.

From their website:
http://www.midwestdemocracynet...f49e208e68c42461664058
"Despite repeated efforts by the MDN and allied civic groups last fall to persuade all the presidential candidates to lay out for the American people their ideas for strengthening the political system, only former Senator John Edwards and Senator Obama chose to do so; their full and unedited responses to the questionnaire were publicly released on November 27, 2007. "

John McCain has gotten a free pass on this because the news media has not reported that
McCain may not be able to opt out of the public financing system for the primary campaign after signing an agreement in November for a loan for his campaign, which could have required him to remain in the race, regardless of whether his candidacy was viable, in order to receive matching funds to pay back the loan. He did that when he was in financial trouble.
The Loan agreement:
http%3A%2F%2Fimages.nictusa.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Ffecimg%2F%3F_28039612468%2B4
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2007/20071207cert.shtml The FEC approved the matching funds with conditions that would require that McCain stay in the race even if he were losing.

McCain sent a letter to the FEC trying to get out of it once private contributions started coming in. Chairman David Mason, in a letter to McCain said the all-but-certain Republican nominee needs to assure the commission that he did not use the promise of public money to help secure a $4 million line of credit he obtained in November." Here is the letter:
http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fec.gov%2Fpress%2Fpress2008%2FFECtoMcCain.PDF
Knowingly violating the spending limit is a criminal offense that could put McCain at risk of stiff fines and up to five years in prison. He has already gotten more than the limit.

Unfortunately the news media still follows a pattern of smearing Obama with this hoax and letting McCain get away with what he is doing by not reporting it. One of the manyexamples of why the news media determines the elections and not the unwitting public.

John
I don't get it. What is the lie that's being perpetrated?

"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's answer? A check next to the box marked "yes."

If McCain goes with public funding, for whatever reason, wouldn't Obama be obligated to do the same? Is McCain going to use public funding?
 

craftech

Senior member
Nov 26, 2000
779
4
81
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
The New York Times, Newsweek, as well as most of the news networks are guilty of perpetrating this lie.

The reference has been to a questionnaire generated by the Midwest Democracy Network:

http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-srv%2Fpolitics%2Fcontent%2FQuestionnaire_Midwest_Democracy_Network_Obama_02192008.pdf

"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's answer? A check next to the box marked "yes." Underneath, the Illinois senator elaborated:

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. "

John McCain did not fill out the questionaire as noted on the website of the Midwest Democracy Network the very people who generated the questionairre.

From their website:
http://www.midwestdemocracynet...f49e208e68c42461664058
"Despite repeated efforts by the MDN and allied civic groups last fall to persuade all the presidential candidates to lay out for the American people their ideas for strengthening the political system, only former Senator John Edwards and Senator Obama chose to do so; their full and unedited responses to the questionnaire were publicly released on November 27, 2007. "

John McCain has gotten a free pass on this because the news media has not reported that
McCain may not be able to opt out of the public financing system for the primary campaign after signing an agreement in November for a loan for his campaign, which could have required him to remain in the race, regardless of whether his candidacy was viable, in order to receive matching funds to pay back the loan. He did that when he was in financial trouble.
The Loan agreement:
http%3A%2F%2Fimages.nictusa.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Ffecimg%2F%3F_28039612468%2B4
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2007/20071207cert.shtml The FEC approved the matching funds with conditions that would require that McCain stay in the race even if he were losing.

McCain sent a letter to the FEC trying to get out of it once private contributions started coming in. Chairman David Mason, in a letter to McCain said the all-but-certain Republican nominee needs to assure the commission that he did not use the promise of public money to help secure a $4 million line of credit he obtained in November." Here is the letter:
http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fec.gov%2Fpress%2Fpress2008%2FFECtoMcCain.PDF
Knowingly violating the spending limit is a criminal offense that could put McCain at risk of stiff fines and up to five years in prison. He has already gotten more than the limit.

Unfortunately the news media still follows a pattern of smearing Obama with this hoax and letting McCain get away with what he is doing by not reporting it. One of the manyexamples of why the news media determines the elections and not the unwitting public.

John
I don't get it. What is the lie that's being perpetrated?

"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's answer? A check next to the box marked "yes."

If McCain goes with public funding, for whatever reason, wouldn't Obama be obligated to do the same? Is McCain going to use public funding?
NO.
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of public funding and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie. And if and when the FEC fines the crap out of McCain I'll guarantee that the news media will distort the facts and blame the FEC.

 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,995
8,369
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
Obama lied, but don't expect Obamabots to admit it.
What's would you have him do while he has deplete his funds fighting the lying party-treasonous Hillarybots, eh? While McCain has the nomination wrapped up and a huge warchest building with which to buy off the media?

The Hillarybots are doing a great job handing an otherwise sure thing election over to the Pubs.
 

Sinsear

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2007
6,435
79
91
Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries.
Oh my; I thought the GOP was the party of the corporations?
 

craftech

Senior member
Nov 26, 2000
779
4
81
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
Under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, violators could face fines up to $25,000 and up to five years of jail time. The news media are not reporting that McCain may have violated those laws and for all his talk about public financing they aren't reporting that he had no choice and that he is actively trying to get out of it.

If I accept that Obama is going against what he said will you accept that McCain should be fined $25,000 and go to jail for five years if the FEC finds that he did in fact violate FEC laws. And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now. I will if you will.

John

 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,449
21,380
136
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries.
Oh my; I thought the GOP was the party of the corporations?
This is probably just more of a statement to the absolutely pathetic nature of McCain's fundraising so far. I mean when Obama is pulling in from 300%-500% of the money McCain is depending on the month, raising more money then him in pretty much all sectors is going to happen.
 

craftech

Senior member
Nov 26, 2000
779
4
81
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: senseamp
Obama lied, but don't expect Obamabots to admit it.
What's would you have him do while he has deplete his funds fighting the lying party-treasonous Hillarybots, eh? While McCain has the nomination wrapped up and a huge warchest building with which to buy off the media?

The Hillarybots are doing a great job handing an otherwise sure thing election over to the Pubs.
The media isn't reporting that Federal Election Commission (FEC) chairman David Mason has taken the position that McCain cannot unilaterally opt out of public financing in the primary without FEC approval, meaning that every day that McCain spends beyond the limits of the public financing system that he has already exceeded, he could be breaking the law. Instead they have been trying to make the case that McCain is a "straight talker" and a "maverick" and that Obama cannot be trusted. They did the same thing with Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000.
In other words, "who would you rather have a beer with" instead of a truthful discussion of the issues. George Bush never did invite me for that beer.
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: craftech
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
Under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, violators could face fines up to $25,000 and up to five years of jail time. The news media are not reporting that McCain may have violated those laws and for all his talk about public financing they aren't reporting that he had no choice and that he is actively trying to get out of it.

If I accept that Obama is going against what he said will you accept that McCain should be fined $25,000 and go to jail for five years if the FEC finds that he did in fact violate FEC laws. And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now. I will if you will.

John
I'll accept that, if the FEC finds him guilty, he should face whatever punishment is deemed fitting. Since maximum penalties and fines are almost never handed out, I highly doubt that would be the penalty that would be deemed as fitting. If it is then so be it.
 

craftech

Senior member
Nov 26, 2000
779
4
81
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
Under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, violators could face fines up to $25,000 and up to five years of jail time. The news media are not reporting that McCain may have violated those laws and for all his talk about public financing they aren't reporting that he had no choice and that he is actively trying to get out of it.

If I accept that Obama is going against what he said will you accept that McCain should be fined $25,000 and go to jail for five years if the FEC finds that he did in fact violate FEC laws. And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now. I will if you will.

John
I'll accept that, if the FEC finds him guilty, he should face whatever punishment is deemed fitting. Since maximum penalties and fines are almost never handed out, I highly doubt that would be the penalty that would be deemed as fitting. If it is then so be it.
And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now as I also stated?

John

 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: senseamp
Obama lied, but don't expect Obamabots to admit it.
What's would you have him do while he has deplete his funds fighting the lying party-treasonous Hillarybots, eh? While McCain has the nomination wrapped up and a huge warchest building with which to buy off the media?

The Hillarybots are doing a great job handing an otherwise sure thing election over to the Pubs.
It takes two to tango. By your logic, Obama and Clinton are both hell bent on handing this one to the republicans.
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: craftech
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
Under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, violators could face fines up to $25,000 and up to five years of jail time. The news media are not reporting that McCain may have violated those laws and for all his talk about public financing they aren't reporting that he had no choice and that he is actively trying to get out of it.

If I accept that Obama is going against what he said will you accept that McCain should be fined $25,000 and go to jail for five years if the FEC finds that he did in fact violate FEC laws. And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now. I will if you will.

John
I'll accept that, if the FEC finds him guilty, he should face whatever punishment is deemed fitting. Since maximum penalties and fines are almost never handed out, I highly doubt that would be the penalty that would be deemed as fitting. If it is then so be it.
And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now as I also stated?

John
Yes...and they are reporting it. I have heard reports from television news agencies and a quick Google News search will show other media also reporting.
 

craftech

Senior member
Nov 26, 2000
779
4
81
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
Under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, violators could face fines up to $25,000 and up to five years of jail time. The news media are not reporting that McCain may have violated those laws and for all his talk about public financing they aren't reporting that he had no choice and that he is actively trying to get out of it.

If I accept that Obama is going against what he said will you accept that McCain should be fined $25,000 and go to jail for five years if the FEC finds that he did in fact violate FEC laws. And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now. I will if you will.

John
I'll accept that, if the FEC finds him guilty, he should face whatever punishment is deemed fitting. Since maximum penalties and fines are almost never handed out, I highly doubt that would be the penalty that would be deemed as fitting. If it is then so be it.
And will you admit that the media should report it and should be reporting what I outlined with evidence above right now as I also stated?

John
Yes...and they are reporting it. I have heard reports from television news agencies and a quick Google News search will show other media also reporting.
You will have to provide the type of links I provided above for me to believe that. Newsweek, The New York Times - all lying to cover up for McCain. And the networks - none are reporting it. Don't tell me to go look it up. Show me like I showed you. Tim Russert distorted this issue at the last Democratic debate then elaborated on the lie for weeks as did the rest of his network with the exception of Keith Olberman on Countdown. CNN is also following this pattern of lies and coverup for McCain. I need transcripts or something similar to accept your claim that they "are reporting it".

John

http://://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/10/us/politics/10campaign.html?ex=1365566400&en=734d9295173cac3a&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

http://://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28obama.html
http://://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0802/20/sitroom.01.html
The subtitle on CNN that day said "McCain to Obama - Keep Your Word"


 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,650
0
0
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: craftech
Read my post. McCain not only did NOT fill out that questionaire and no one is holding him accountable to it, he had no choice but to accept public funding according to the loan agreement and the media is not telling the public that. Moreover he is trying to get out of it and so far the FEC hasn't agreed to it because they think he may have used the FEC financing terms to keep his campaign from going broke and then when private money started coming in tried to get out of public financing in favor of private financing. The media isn't reporting that either. He may have violated the election laws and the media isn't reporting that either. Instead they repeat this distortion over and over to drive Obama's credibility down and McCain's up. They lie.
So, aside from some deflecting, you're still saying that McCain will be using public funding and, if McCain does use public funding, Obama will be going against what he said he would do.

With the money that Obama is bringing in, and the fact that he's not going to live up to his word, you can't fault McCain for trying to get out of using public funding.

I still don't see the media lie on this one.
When is a lie not a lie?

When you look at the actual circumstances of the situation and/or the context of the "lie". Obama clearly put conditions on his answer to the question. Now to determine if it truly is a lie, you have to find out if the conditions were met or not. If they were met, then it is clearly a lie (or at the absolute best...a calculated change of mind based on extenuating circumstances). If the conditions were not met however, it is not a lie and if those that are declaring it to be one know that the stated conditions were not met...they are the liars (and at the very best being intellectually lazy and/or dishonest in presenting the information).

Now, let's look at the conditions to determine if this was a lie.

Question I-B:
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?

Yes ___ No ___

CLINTON: No response.

HUCKABEE: No response.

MCCAIN: No response.

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.

PAUL: No response.
1. Obama will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Repub nominee (McCain now) to preserve a publicly financed general election Check (sounds like this is what his proposal was that he mentions in his answer and is consistent with the proposal he is touting/offering now)

2. McCain would have to agree to a fundraising truce. Kinda but not really/only because he legally has no choice right now

McCain, meanwhile, has returned money he raised for the general and is taking steps to build up the Republican Party's fundraising to assist him in the campaign.
This whole thing boils down to the fact that Obama and Edwards were the only candidates from any party that had the stones to put their opinions and intentions out there for the voters to actually have information to make a decision based on.

Questionaire can be viewed here also.

Since mid-February, the country has witnessed a heated debate about which presidential candidates are or are not committed to forgoing private financing of their general election campaigns this fall in favor of participating in the presidential public financing system. This controversy has attracted widespread news coverage and prompted numerous editorials, including in the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Philadelphia Inquirer, and the St. Petersburg Times.

To a large extent, this debate has been fueled by conflicting interpretations of Senator Barack Obama?s written response to a question concerning his intention to participate in the presidential public financing system. This question was contained in a questionnaire from the Midwest Democracy Network, which all the presidential candidates were invited to answer in the fall of 2007. In addition to campaign finance, the MDN questionnaire covered government ethics, lobbying regulation, federal communications policy, election laws and voting rights, and congressional redistricting. In keeping with a September 2007 pledge not to comment or pass judgments on the candidates? views and positions, our organizations do not intend at this point to take sides in disputes over the meaning of their answers. In our view, these are matters better left to voters and the candidates to sort out for themselves.

Despite repeated efforts by the MDN and allied civic groups last fall to persuade all the presidential candidates to lay out for the American people their ideas for strengthening the political system, only former Senator John Edwards and Senator Obama chose to do so; their full and unedited responses to the questionnaire were publicly released on November 27, 2007.

Because of the extraordinary attention Senator Obama?s answers have recently attracted, on February 19, 2008 the MDN once again contacted the remaining major presidential contenders ? Senator Hillary Clinton, Governor Mike Huckabee, Senator John McCain, and Congressman Ron Paul ? and encouraged them to follow Edwards? and Obama?s example by explaining their own views on these issues. We urged the candidates to submit their completed questionnaires by Tuesday, February 26 in order to give voters in next week?s critically important primary elections a chance to weigh their positions on issues that continue to concern millions of their fellow Americans. None of these candidates opted to respond. And so it is in that spirit but with a large measure of disappointment that we respectfully submit the attached document for voters? consideration.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
If it takes a post that long to explain why what he said wasn't a lie, then he made a mistake saying it.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,650
0
0
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries.
Oh my; I thought the GOP was the party of the corporations?
This is another of those half-truths being touted out by Hillary and the GOP. Obama has not accepted any corporate donations but anyone giving a donation is required to enter where they work or the industry that the work in.

When they add up the money donated by people that work AT companies in those sectors he is leading (coincidentally he is leading EVERYONE in money raised so this is not a surprise). However, if you look at the amount of money given on BEHALF of those industries, he is at the very bottom.

Candidate contributions (click name for more details)

PAC contributions:

Obama: $250 (yes that is just $250)
Clinton: $1,157,939
McCain: $687,794
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,926
18
81
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries.
Oh my; I thought the GOP was the party of the corporations?
This is another of those half-truths being touted out by Hillary and the GOP. Obama has not accepted any corporate donations
law firms aren't corporations? hm.

half truths? like he doesn't take money from oil companies (because it's illegal?)
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,650
0
0
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Mr. Obama leads all candidates in donations from the pharmaceutical industry and commercial banks, among other industries.
Oh my; I thought the GOP was the party of the corporations?
This is another of those half-truths being touted out by Hillary and the GOP. Obama has not accepted any corporate donations
law firms aren't corporations? hm.

half truths? like he doesn't take money from oil companies (because it's illegal?)
Put the Hillary-aid down. You are starting to believe the bullshit.

Once again, if I (working for a semiconductor company) donate money to a candidate, it is not equal to the entire semiconductor company supporting and donating to that candidate. Either you are intentionally being dishonest or you are pretty gullible and truly believe the rhetoric being spoon fed to you.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS