Letters to the Editor
Uncle Fester
Published Letters: 1346 Editor's Choice: 12
-
@AKA Smith
[Read the article: The "plagiarism" problem]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Most of all, I want the Democrats to win. On many issues, I think McCain would be a competent president, but I want the war to end and I want a Democratic president to be the one making those SCOTUS nominations.
Agreed. It's been sad watching McCain 2008 systematically sell out the positions of McCain 2000. The torture vote was only the last in series of capitulations. It looks like he skipped drinking the Kool Aid and went straight to an IV.
-
Better...
[Read the article: Would the Democratic candidates make your food safer?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]At least this story is an original one based upon a topic that has relevance to every American in their daily lives.
Much appreciated Alex. Yeah!
-
@AKA Smith: Rufus and the McCain "Pact"
[Read the article: "Name some of Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments ... if you can" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Rufus is a blue-collar wordsmith who is currently laboring under the false impression that the force of his ideas and convictions (not to mention his service to our country) will carry the day and win the hearts and minds of Salon readers dispite his rather clunky grammar and incorregible attitude towards spelling [yes dude, more people would listen if you cleaned it up].
He should be aware that the posters and readers of Salon all aspire to a certain literary refinement, with the notable exception of one of my favourite posters, Notorious W.E.S., who finds such pretense vulgar.
John McCain has substantial record which includes campaign reform. Are any of you even aware of the pact that Obama made with John McCain concerning the use of campaign funds in the GE?
I'm not sure what 'pact' you are referring to. The Midwest Demcoracy Network questionnaire filled in by Obama mentions 'pursuing an agreement with the Republican nominee'. It's not an unconditional deal, and as prior posters have mentioned, McCain has already made a Bank loan collaterialized with public funds, which seems like stretching the rules at least. Do you have another pact in mind?
The revolution will be on Google:
Link to full questionnaire:
http://www.midwestdemocracynetwork.org/templates/media/MDNPresidentialQuestionnaire.pdf
Excerpt with full text of Question and Obama response:
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?
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.
-
@AKA Smith : public election funding
[Read the article: "Name some of Barack Obama's legislative accomplishments ... if you can" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks for the link (actually like following up when possible). I haven't seen the NYT story before, so I share your growing sense of confusion about what the real story is. I thought Obama's funding commitment came from the midwest democracy network survey released in November 07, not a February 07 statement, which I haven't read.
I just did a quick google ("obama february 2007 public funding" ) and found this link from the correct time period:
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2007/02/fec-may-allow-obama-to-preserve-public.html
Here's the opening lead:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Under a draft proposal released Thursday by the Federal Election Commission, Sen. Barack Obama would be allowed to raise private funds for the 2008 presidential general election while keeping open the option of returning that money should he later decide to accept public funding.
My take from the articles is that both have Obama considering public funds, but not unconditionally committing to them. There's probably more nuance to the story, but I'll leave that to others, such as the Salon editors (heh).
That leaves multiple story narratives including Obama trying to have it both ways, that he's optimistic but not stupid, and it's the same old b.s. just told better.
I'm not sure what I think. I'm not the type of guy that thinks all we have to do is elect Obama to live happily ever after. Or Hillary for that matter. I used to respect McCain for his anti-party positions on the Tax Cuts, the agents of religious intolerance and torture. But he has reversed himself on each issue. His party has gelded him and he allowed it.
And I'm not sure if McCain has already violated his pledge about funding. I'll have to ponder his financial engineering to determine if I think it is a bait and switch.
Any Democrat considering a protest vote for McCain if their fave candidate doesn't make the nomination (we're not quite dead yet) should really pause and take a deep breath and think about it. A lot.