Barack Obama, as has been expected for months, has decided not to accept government funding for his presidential campaign. The Republicans really left him no choice unless he wanted to suffer the same fate as John Kerry, who came under attack from the Swift Boat Liars in August at a point where he did not have sufficient funds to respond. As long as McCain stood to benefit from the same tactics, Obama could not afford to tie his hands.
The Republican National Committee, along with many conservative blogs, are attacking Obama for deciding against accepting federal matching funds. They don’t mention the fact that Obama never agreed to accept them if the Republicans failed to cooperate in fixing the problems in the system which benefit them.
The leads to quite a reversal philosophically. It is now the Republicans who make government funding the ideal, while they attack a privately-funded opponent. The transformation of the Republicans as the party of big government, which has progressed throughout Bush’s years in office, is now complete.
While I think the idea of public financing for elections is a crock, I do find it interesting how people that have no problem pushing the idea that only the Government can solve problems don’t think that the government can help them. I also have a problem with the fact that the presidential candidates, and even some potential candidates got taxpayer funded security while at the same time raising millions of dollars. So Hillary was the first lady and Obama got threats, no one is forcing them to run, if they put themselves in harms way, they should be responsible for protection, not the government.
“I do find it interesting how people that have no problem pushing the idea that only the Government can solve problems don’t think that the government can help them.”
And which people believe that only the Government can solve problems? That is just a typical conservative line to distort the views of those they disagree with and to try to distract from the failures of their own government policies.
There are many things the government should not do, but protecting candidates for office is one that I think most people would agree is acceptable, regardless of party.
Why should the government provide free security to primary candidates that are raising well over 100 million dollars in contributions? Especially when said candidates are already being given a free leave of absence from a government job, so that they can run for another? With the obscene amounts they collect in donations, ponying up for their own security in the PRIMARIES shouldn’t be a big deal. Especially since some get secret service protection and others don’t. Once it is the general election, I could possibly see it, but for the primaries, NO