Campbell Brown heads down the FOX rabbit hole over at CNN:
You may have heard that Wednesday night Barack Obama will be on five different TV networks speaking directly to the American people.
He bought 30 minutes of airtime from the different networks, a very expensive purchase. But hey, he can afford it. Barack Obama is loaded, way more loaded than John McCain, way more loaded than any presidential candidate has ever been at this stage of the campaign.
Just to throw a number out: He has raised well over $600 million since the start of his campaign, close to what George Bush and John Kerry raised combined in 2004.
Without question, Obama has set the bar at new height with a truly staggering sum of cash. And that is why as we approach this November, it is worth reminding ourselves what Barack Obama said last November.
One year ago, he made a promise. He pledged to accept public financing and to work with the Republican nominee to ensure that they both operated within those limits.
Then it became clear to Sen. Obama and his campaign that he was going to be able to raise on his own far more cash than he would get with public financing. So Obama went back on his word.
Here’s reality from one of those factinista outlets, the New York Times:
“Should John McCain win the Republican nomination, we will agree to accept public financing in the general election, if the Democratic nominee agrees to do the same,” Mr. Nelson said.
A spokesman for Mr. Obama, Bill Burton, said, “We hope that each of the Republican candidates pledges to do the same.”
Mr. Burton added that if nominated Mr. Obama would “aggressively pursue an agreement” with whoever was his opponent.
That was in 2007. Fast-forward to 2008, and CBS:
Last March, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the candidate would “aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”
Doesn’t sound like much changed over the course of that year, eh? Pursuing and actually inking an agreement are a weeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit different – and I don’t think you need a law degree to grasp that concept.
Obama also told the Midwest Democracy Network, in a questionnaire, that he would participate in the system, writing that he had proposed a system in which “both major party candidates…agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.”
The Obama campaign has since suggested that Obama never vowed to take public financing, with Burton stating on Feb. 17 of this year that “there is no pledge.”
Well, where’s the actual quote where he actually says that he’ll actually participate in public financing irrespective of what McBush does?
McCain has hammered Obama for what he says is a clear case of the senator potentially breaking his promise.
“We both made a commitment to take public financing. There’s nothing to talk about. We either keep our word or we don’t keep our word,” McCain said
I don’t see it there. How ’bout over at ABC?
“It was very clear to me that Senator Obama had agreed to having public financing of the general election campaign if I did the same thing,” McCain told a crowd in Oshkosh, Wisconsin Friday morning, “I made the commitment to the American people that if I were the nominee of my party, I would go the route of public financing. I expect Senator Obama to keep his word to the American people as well.”
Obama responded to McCain’s comments in the nearby city of Milwaukee, saying the jury is still out on his commitment. Obama explained that it would be something he’d have to talk over with McCain if they both were their respective party’s nominees, but indicated the discussion is premature at this point.
“If I am the nominee, then I will make sure that our people talk to John McCain’s people to find out if we’re willing to abide by the same rules and regulations with respect to the general election going forward. But it would be presumptuous of me to say now that I’m locking myself into something when I don’t even know if the other side is going to agree to it.”
McBush saw it clearly, eh?
Would that be with the same clarity by which you saw Bible Spice as being not ethically challenged? And not someone who has consorted with witchdoctors? And actually being competent to be president?