Obama '08?

Well what do you know. Obama is looking more and more like a common politician all the time. Who would have thought it? Spin away Cyclo.

The two are part of the same deal; without an agreement to limit 527 involvement - which, as I said before, Obama is currently doing on the Dem side whether McCain does or not, upholding his promise to do so - Obama's camp never intended to take the public funds. Kerry did that, and it was a huge mistake, b/c the 527 groups savaged him when he didn't have much money available to fight back at the time due to the limitations (or at least that's how I remember it, and he describes it today). Obama would be foolish to make the same mistake, and in fact, did not make the same mistake.

Cycloptichorn

527s are independent civic organizations. If some liberal activists wanted to start up a Swiftboat-like organization against McCain, Obama would have no power to prevent them. At best, he could let them carry out their smears and apologize later if necessary. Kind of like he did when his people denied seats to Muslim women with headscarfs.

So how can 527s be part of any enforceable agreement between two presidential candidates? They can't. They just serve as a convenient pretense for Obama to break his own deal.

Attempting to defend the indefensable is a sure sign of one whose partisanship has trumped his discretion. No one has accused Obama of anything worse than politics as usual and a certain degree of hypocrisy with respect to his earlier, self-serving statements.

Not quite, George. On top of all this, I also accused Obama of doing his nation a grave disservice by further undermining the public campaign finance system.

LINK

Whole article (including uncomplimentary comments re McCain) posted
HERE

McCain can at least ask them to not engage in the attacks. Obama has currently done exactly this on the Dem side. At one point of the primary, McCain signaled that he was going to do this; he has since, as is his way, changed his position on this issue.

Our campaign finance laws are a joke. When outside groups can spend unlimited amounts of money, with no real oversight or any pretense of restraint from the candidates, the efficacy of the laws is reduced to about zero. Obama's buying into the system without a tacit agreement that the other side would self limit in the way that the Dems currently are would have been politically foolish.

I'd like to address another point. I don't know when Obama told you bunch that he was going to act as a weakling, and now your panties are all in a twist that he is not doing so. When he promised to move beyond the politics of 'fear and personal destruction,' it wasn't a promise to accept every situation that could harm him without fighting back. It wasn't a promise to not try and gain advantages during this election. I don't recall Obama promising to take public financing no matter what the McCain position was, and I'd be interested to see if anyone could produce a link or quote which sounds even remotely like that.

I think what has happened here is a little bit of confirmation bias. He was referred to as a 'new type' of politician, and has himself referred to a 'new type' of politics. This is used as a weapon against him now; an image has been falsely constructed of him, one that no actual person could live up to, that he will never do anything wrong or even somewhat objectionable.

I never held such an image of the guy, who is a flawed politician just like all the other ones. I just happen to hold him in a higher esteem then most for various reasons. The fact that he refuses to let the Republicans trap him in the way that they did Kerry is one of those reasons.

Cycloptichorn

All in all, I can understand why people would try and attack Obama on this issue: they have little else to attack him with. But I think that it will garner approximately zero traction with the public, who for the most part could care less about the Public financing system. McCain's bunch will try and make hay out of it, and fail, in the same fashion they have failed to make significant hay out of other events this cycle.

In other news,

http://www.newsweek.com/id/142465

Obama leads McCain 51-36 in a new Newsweek poll.

Cycloptichorn

Per the article I just posted, the only 501Cs running such attacks are groups supporting Obama. He must not have much clout with anybody, huh.

Cycloptichorn -- I have now reached the point in our discussion where I have said all I care to say on this particular issue. Rather than waste your time and mine by repeating myself, I'll just drop it for now.

Maybe it doesn't matter to most democrats or people supporting Obama; but I still find it curious that his proclaimed "new kind of politics" isn't so new.

Fine with me.

Cycloptichorn

... Then you have not been paying attention.

CI, see what I wrote above about it. You are using statements that he has made about running a clean race, to attack him for attempting to gain an advantage in the race - but not attacking anyone or acting in an unfair fashion.

When his 'new politics' is used to mean 'never does anything to gain an advantage,' you are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Cycloptichorn

As a matter of fact, Hillary never had my interest, because she played the old form of politics for self-interest over the party; I saw her as a power-hungry candidate and nothing more.

So, which one of those attacks has so far proven effective? Which one lead to a drop in his polling or support?

That's what I thought - none of them. Republicans are casting about for anything they can find to stick on Obama, currently nothing has.

Cycloptichorn

Does this tactic work? (. . .she says hopefully)

I'm not worried about McCain; even the "real" conservatives don't like McCain. They'll probably pinch their noses when they go into the booth to vote.

You are of course free to drop out of any of your losing arguments at any point, Fox. Nobody is forcing you to carry on.

Cycloptichorn