...that, or everyone else is.

To me, this just seems like shrewd politics. In politics, you avoid making solid commitments as much as possible, because even the appearance of one will come to bite you in the ass later should you need to change your position.

So to me, this reads like, "Obama wants campaign finance reform, and was willing to accept public money, but after some careful analysis, decided against it because he sees the need for more money based on what he predicts will be coming down the pipe soon."

That, to me, is a sign of a good leader. Not a waffler or a flip-flopper. Just someone who can adapt to changing situations and adjust his strategy accordingly. Methinks you people have spent the last 8 years watching "Stay The Course" Shrubbery too long, and you've forgotten how things work in the real world.

I'd agree that the 527 threat has yet to materialize, but I think it'd be foolhardy to pretend that just because it hasn't yet, it never will.

But I think the real danger here, which both Alex and Obama neglect to mention, is that much of the damage being done to Obama currently is being done by simple word-of-mouth type stuff, specifically email forwards. They cost nothing, and they're hard as hell to combat.

The U.N. is the big driver behind global warming and stand to get billions in greenhouse gas taxes if every country agrees to abide by their regulations. While I don't buy into this whole global warming bit...

The U.N. doesn't levy taxes.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide has been increasing for over 100 years. The mean global temperature has increased by .73 degrees Farenheit from 1905 to 2005. The overwhelming majority of scientists maintain that the world is getting warmer. This has been verified by so many scientific studies that it's absolutely ridiculous that idiots still come along and debate the validity of the science, especially when the vast majority of those doubters have absolutely no experience with the science (or any science at all).

As is usual, doubters here in the commeents quote short-term figures as evidence that global warming is a myth, in spite of the fact that global warming trends tend to become evident over the long term. That means little. Greenhouse gas concentrations as a percentage of the Earth's atmosphere have been steadily increasing since humans began keeping measurements of that kind of thing.

The debate (for people who do not seek to bury their heads in the sand or spend all their time daydreaming up new conspiracies) has shifted from whether or not global warming is occuring to trying to quantify its effects and better understand how different parts of the Earth's surface may be affected.

The idiots who shriek about anyone who participates in global warming research as "alarmist" are far worse. For every terrible challenge humanity has ever faceed, there have always been vocal opponents who clamor for the world to ignore the issue, or who claim that it simply isn't an issue, or who seek to minimize the issue so that they and those they represent may find and exploit financial opportunities, which is why it's very ironic that the position you've adopted is the exact inverse: those who do this research will somehow benefit more than the industries most responsible for emitting carbon would by simply not taking steps.