\u201cIn 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\u2026.If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.\u201d
\n\u2013 Barack Obama, November 2007<\/p>\n
Of course this was a bald-faced lie and anyone with half a brain saw this coming months ago. The right naturally pointed out what pathological liar this clown is turning out to be but then something happened that I did not expect.<\/p>\n
Curt has the story<\/a>:<\/p>\n During the runup to the general election Barack Obama received up to 120 endorsements from the nations newspapers. Many of them lauded his support of campaign finance reform. But now that he has opted out of public financing those same papers are a bit pissed.<\/p>\n Of the editorial boards that opined Friday about his breaking the pledge, most of those that endorsed him during the primary were aggressive in their criticism.<\/p>\n The Philadelphia Inquirer\u2019s called the decision \u201cas disappointing as it is disingenuous,\u201d while the Boston Globe\u2019s wrote it \u201cdeals a body blow \u2026 to his own reputation as a reform candidate.\u201d And The Baltimore Sun\u2019s editorial called it \u201ca major disappointment for those struggling to restrain the pernicious influence of special interests in American politics.\u201d <\/p>\n The New York Times\u2019 editorial board, which endorsed Clinton after allegedly leaning toward Obama, wrote that \u201cObama has come up short\u201d of \u201chis evocative vows to depart from self-interested politics.\u201d<\/p>\n The Washington Post opined that Obama\u2019s \u201ceffort to cloak his broken promise in the smug mantle of selfless dedication to the public good is a little hard to take.\u201d<\/p>\n And USA Today, which also did not endorse any candidates, said Obama put \u201cexpediency over principle,\u201d was \u201cdisingenuous about his reasons for opting out of public financing\u201d and proved he\u2019s not a \u201creal reformer.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Captain Renault: I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!<\/p>\n The reason this caught me a bit by surprise is that it is nothing more than a continuation of a long pattern of lies from Obama. There is a great list of his proven lies here<\/a>.<\/p>\n But this is no different than blasting NAFTA while pandering in Ohio then sending his economic advisor to the Canadians whispering; it\u2019s okay, he\u2019s just pandering.<\/p>\n Or his claim to immediately withdraw from Iraq but when his foreign policy advisor is cornered on the question she said that he would naturally have to \u201cre-assess\u201d that position once in office.<\/p>\n This man is nothing more than a political opportunist and opportunist lie; a lot.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"