I wonder what other principles currently espoused by Obama will be jettisoned the moment they become inconvenient.

Oh yeah, I'm one of them.

I'll have to mull it over for a while, because nothing comes to mind.

Did he not know about 527s at the time, or that the RNC had a lot more in reserves than the DNC? Essentially, I think he's making the right decision NOW, and that the original promise was flawed.

He still has the moral high ground, due to his (and now the DNC's) rejection of lobbyist and PAC money. THAT's where we need to be if we want real campaign finance reform, and the fact that they're doing this voluntarily is quite impressive.

As long as he attacks Iran everything will be just fine.

That is, change their position when "facts on the ground" change? I know I see this through an Obama supporter's lens, but his concerns are with the corrupting and corrosive nature of big money in politics. When he made the initial proposals about using public money, no one knew the staggering amount of money he would raise from small donations. A million small donations cannot really buy favors.

What we should know is how much he will be relying on bundlers (like Clinton's "Hill Raisers" and Bush's "Pioneers"), who are clearly sliding around campaign finance laws to buy access. If THIS is the M.O. for a significant portion of his general election money, then we should be concerned that he will be engaging in the kind of quid pro quo that typifies modern politics, and which he is ostensibly running against.

The moment John McCain said he couldn't "referee" ads by 527 groups, he gave Sen. Obama the perfect opening.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/06/13/obama_smears/

This article reflects a complete misunderstanding of Obama's statement in the questionnaire from the Midwest Democracy Project, a misunderstanding that has been promoted by the McCain campaign and some of McCain's allies in the campaign finance world.

Obama answered the question by saying that if he was the nominee, he would "aggressively pursue and agreeement to maintain a publicly financed campaign." That was not naive; it was obviously conscious that such an agreement would involve more than just a simple commitment to take public $ if McCain did. It would have to be a complete agreement, governing the role of 527s, McCain's GELAC fund (a giant loophole they have pursued aggressively), party money, and other factors. McCain made no effort to pursue such an agreement.

Please take the time to understand the issue before repeating McCain spin. Obama's broad base of support is entirely admirable, and he is neither breaking a promise nor doing anything wrong by using it to finance his campaign.

Moreover, this decision breaks a promise Obama made repeatedly to use public financing if his opponent in the general election would agree to do so as well.

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.

Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham were on the board of "Freedom Watch". McCain lied on a loan application to keep his primary campaign afloat.

Alex, I know Hillary was your girl, but it's over. Get over it.

First, promote corporatist Clinton for President so that both candidates in the general election are in their pockets. Use whatever means necessary, including racism, claims of sexism against the world, etc., to push Clinton.

When that fails, option two, to attack Obama for any and all things that aren't 100% leftist by whatever scale promoted.

This pretty much identifies Salon's editorial position, especially the headline. Expect a lot of these attacks from the "idealistic left" about all the things that Obama should or shouldn't be doing.

Politics is not about purity. I expect anyone elected will disappoint me plenty. Get the SOB into office and then complain.

Let's not conflate the ability to raise money through lobbyists, PACs and 527s with the ability to obtain over a million small-dollar donations. This issue is not about "principle"-it's about effectiveness.

Go clutch your pearls and faint on some other couch.

Yes, the system is broken but Obama needs to do what is necessary to win. The public system as currently constructed limits him-he is wise to opt out if he can do better elsewhere. And he has.

He said he would agree to public financing if the Republican nominee did the same. Not only did McCain reject public financing, but he first pretended he would accept it in order to leverage for a loan. Not even a Republican could deny the moral disparity here, which is why all the McCain campaign can muster is the pathetic claim that Obama didn't pursue the agreement aggressively enough. Did they want him to take McCain out to a nice candlelit dinner or what?

Go ahead, keep making snarky comments about "Obamabots". I'm sure using that word makes you feel very clever.

Sorry for cheating on you honey, but the "facts on the ground have changed". What kind of B.S. is that?!?

He broke his word when it suited him--that's the end of it.

Pathetic--end even more pathetic are the Obama supporters trying to rationalize this away. So is this the "Change we can believe in"???

Good, he can raise all kinds of money and the Repubs cannot. Finally the Democrats have an advantage! This is not a negative, this is a positive. This doesn't have to be spun at all! Good. People don't care anything about this supposed issue. And Barack Obama isn't raising most of his money from rich donors, but from regular folks like us, which means he is beholden you know to the people, to do their bidding, no the bidding of Bear Sterns, Enron Loopholes, The French Government (AirBus and the Tanker deal), etc, etc, etc.

Obama 08

But this should have been announced on the Friday preceding the 4th of July holiday. Now it will get 2 days of news coverage.

If you like Obama, it does not matter. If you do not like him, it does. If you are undecided, you are probably in that category because you are not following politics closely. So they will miss the story.

And if they say Obama lied about campaign financing, just run $30MM in TV ads saying "nu-uh, I didn't lie". The system is all about money, and it is nice to have that edge for once. To give it up would be silly. American voters punish candidates who do 'the right thing'.