The Hill's Blog Briefing Room » Cole Says Obama Is 'Nixonian to the Core'

Morning Read | Midday Blog Roundup | Day's End Roundup

June 24, 2008

Cole Says Obama Is 'Nixonian to the Core'

@ 1:50 pm by Andy Barr

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) on Tuesday called Barack Obama's decision to break a pledge and forgo public financing for the general election "Nixonian to the core."

"The facts of the matter are simple enough. Obama made verbal and written promises to accept public financing in the general election campaign if his Republican opponent would agree to do the same," Cole wrote in a post on The Hill's Congress Blog.

Cole is chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC),

"It is not just the fact that Obama will now be the first major party presidential nominee since Watergate to opt out of public financing in the general election that should raise eyebrows — though it makes the Richard Nixon comparison even more compelling. In classic Richard Nixon style Obama chose to blame his reversal on his opponents than accept responsibility for the decision himself. Nixon always had some plausible sounding excuse to one up his opponents, to reverse his positions and to lower his standards. That excuse was the same one Obama chose to offer in defense of his recent reversal — political expediency," the Oklahoma Republican wrote.

Cole said Obama opting out of public financing would hurt down-ballot Democrats by diverting funds from donors that would not usually contribute to a general election. The NRCC chair also said Obama's move will damage the "personal credibility" of any Democrat trying to defend the Illinois senator's decision.

"Campaigns tell us who a candidate is as well as what he believes," Cole wrote. "And, last week Barack Obama looked and acted a lot like Richard Nixon. That ought to concern his supporters even more than his opponents."

Archived under: Campaigns, News, Presidential Campaigns
Tags: Barack Obama, Tom Cole

60 Comments »

The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.

But let us be perfectly clear….He is "not" a crook.

Comment by Josph — June 24, 2008 @ 2:29 pm
"political expediency"…Chavez uses that term a lot doesn't he?

Comment by pieman — June 24, 2008 @ 2:31 pm
Interestingly, Cole voted for RMN for president twice. It seems to me that Cole should limit himself to that which is is competent: rimming GWB's butt.

Comment by randall — June 24, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
I wonder if the same faux outrage should be extended to McSames ILLEGAL use of public funds to secure loans for his primary campaign.

Comment by Jhill123 — June 24, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
Nixonian in his dirty tricks and unethical campaign…but Carteresque in his policies.

Comment by ynot4tony2 — June 24, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
Oh please.

"Altogether, Obama's campaign has taken in an unprecedented $226 million, most of it contributed online. His donor base is larger than the one the Democratic National Committee had for the 2000 election.

These are hardly political fat cats. Ninety percent of his donors give $100 or less, and 41 percent have given $25 or less, according to the Obama campaign. Overall, he has raised 45 percent of his money in small contributions. Hillary Rodham Clinton's figure is 30 percent, Republican John McCain's is 23 percent."

You can call that Nixonian. I call that Democracy. No other campaign in the history of the US has raised that much money from small donors. John McCain's war chest, on the other hand has been driven by a greater amount of large donations by big corporations, big oil, big insurance, and big pharma, and that, to me, is downright Nixonian.

Comment by RC — June 24, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
John McCain is BREAKING THE LAW. If that is not Nixonian, I don't know what is. You should all be reading this article by the Washington Post. I don't understand why there's no outrage over this. Obama may have not abided by his earlier words, but none of those words were promises or even "pledges." McCain on the other hand, has broken the very laws that he helped write:

Sen. John McCain has officially broken the limits imposed by the presidential public financing system, reports filed last night show.

McCain has now spent $58.4 million on his primary effort. Those who have committed to public financing can spend no more than $54 million on their primary bid.

So has McCain broken the law? The answer is far from simple.

It depends on whether he has, in fact, withdrawn from the public matching program. McCain was certified to enter the matching program last year when he was starved for cash. But once he started to win primaries, he decided to step back from it. On Feb. 6, after his Super Tuesday victories, he wrote to the FEC to announce he would withdraw from the program.

McCain's lawyers said that gave him freedom to spend as much as he wanted — once he announced his intent to withdraw from the system, they say, he was released from the spending caps.

But Federal Election Commission Chairman David Mason wrote McCain's campaign last month to alert him that the commission had not yet granted his Feb. 6 request to withdraw, and that the commission would first need to vote on the matter. A snag: The FEC has four vacancies and therefore lacks a quorum to consider the matter.

There's little agreement on what the FEC would have done, had they been able to meet. In part, that's because McCain borrowed $4 million from a commercial bank, and promised to pay the money back through his fundraising efforts. If the campaign went badly, he told the bank, he would use future matching funds to help repay the loan. The rules say that candidates who use matching funds as collateral have to remain within the confines of the system. The Democratic National Committee filed a complaint to the FEC about McCain's actions, but without that quorum, evaluation of the complaint has been stalled.

Comment by SKG — June 24, 2008 @ 2:41 pm
What's Nixonian is McCain breaking the McCain-Feingold financing law. Obama IS taking public financing. He's taking it is small contributions from individual members of the public.

The PURPOSE of the public financing system was to remove the corrupting influence of donors. Only a Republican would think there's anything corrupt about being financed directly by the voters.

Comment by Seth Chandler — June 24, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
So, Obama promised to take public financing if his opponent did the same. McCain opts IN to public funding, then uses the promise of public funds to secure a private loan…and then attempts to opt out of public financing.

Obama may have broken his word (depending on how you wish to look at it), but McCain is daily breaking the law. Which law? The campaign finance reform law which bears his name.

Sorry, but the RNCC can't pin that tail on the donkey-candidate.

Comment by Tim — June 24, 2008 @ 2:49 pm
The repugnacons are hilarious … labeling Obama as one of their own when it suits them. All the finger pointing makes me happy. We all know when a finger is pointed 3 fingers are pointing back toward the accuser!!!

Comment by Doreen — June 24, 2008 @ 2:50 pm
Yeah, all those $25 donations are just so corrupting! Obama is totally beholden to…the American people!
Also, McCain is currently breaking the law by refusing to abide by primary spending limits he previously promised to abide by when his campaign was on the verge of bankruptcy. Talk about breaking a promise and political expediency! He's literally BREAKING THE LAW! When's the media going to pick up on that? Or is the lie just too big to believe.

Comment by John — June 24, 2008 @ 2:53 pm
[…] o o s e D r o p s . . . noteworthy headlines & perspectives Electing Obama means we elect another Nixon? In his faux-presidential seal, did Obama display his own "Mission […]

Pingback by POLYSEMY Online: The Daily Goose — June 24, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
If anyone bothers to read what Obama actually said, it should be obvious that he did not unconditionally promise to accept public financing. The only way Cole can make his claim is by distorting the facts. In any case, Cole is a hypocrite by turning a blind eye to McCain's questionable opting in and out of public financing.

Comment by Jim — June 24, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
What "written promises" did he break?

Comment by Jay — June 24, 2008 @ 3:12 pm
Just Republicans spinning history as they always do. He wrote that if he could come to an agreement with the Republican candidate, he would stay with it. McCain has said he has no interest in stopping the 527's, so therefore no deal was struck.

But Republicans will use ANYTHING they can get their hands on. McCain breaks rules, flip flops daily, is in bed with all types of lobbyists (literally) and the huge thing Repubs have against Obama is he backed off a supposed pledge he DIDNT back off of and that hes too young and too scarey. Republicans have ruined this once great country, and will try to ruin anyone who wants to bring it back.

Comment by Mark — June 24, 2008 @ 3:17 pm
[…] What does that make McCain? Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said Tuesday that Barack Obama's decision to break a pledge and forgo public financing for the general election was "Nixonian." […]

Pingback by If Obama is Nixon… : Overclocked Drama — June 24, 2008 @ 3:19 pm
It's so sweet of Tom Cole to be concerned about how Obama will affect down ticket Dems.

Comment by Jen — June 24, 2008 @ 3:20 pm
Great article- impressive journalism. One…long…quotation.

Comment by John R. — June 24, 2008 @ 3:27 pm
So Tom Cole now supports public financing? Because in April of this year he said he did not:

Q: Do you support voluntary public funding of all federal elections to reduce the influence big money has on our democracy? You'd be able to spend more time serving your country and less time dialing for campaign contributions.

Listen to: U.S. Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK)

A: First of all, I’m opposed to public funding of political campaigns – first and foremost because most of the public is as well. It’s not a very popular system. Second, it doesn’t remove money from campaigns; it just removes it from candidates. And you see it spent through all sorts of special interest groups and organizations with every point of view. So I would much prefer that my tax dollars go to fund government, and that I contribute to candidates I support as opposed to a portion of the money that I pay to the government being diverted to people I may or may not support.

Answered on Apr 18th, 2008
http://www.askyourlawmaker.org/node/358

Comment by The Turk — June 24, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
This is not relevant. Obama said, I believe, he would opt for public financing IF he and McCain could agree on terms of accepting. McCain opted out. Obama is free to opt out also!! Besides, as long as Obama beats McCain I really don't care what he does. So there!!!!!

Comment by mary — June 24, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
I thought he was Carter but now he's Nixon..the Republicans are obviously getting desperate; who will he be next according to the "publicans"? LMAO

Comment by Winn30344 — June 24, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
~~ In classic Richard Nixon style Obama chose to blame his reversal on his opponents than accept responsibility for the decision himself. Nixon always had some plausible sounding excuse to one up his opponents, to reverse his positions and to lower his standards~~
LOL…OMG!!! Seriously…do you want to go there? Seriously?
After 8 years of not once accepting responsibility, always blaming the other guy…blaming Clinton whenever possible…oh..this is funny!!
Republicans never accept responsibility..never.

Sen. Obama made a promise to… meet and discuss.. with McCain to conditions.
McCain sent his lawyers. There was a meeting, it was clear to Sen. Obama that Republicans did not have honest intentions…he did what he had to do.

Comment by genia — June 24, 2008 @ 3:36 pm
Geez, he's Carter, he's Nixon, he's Clinton — make up your MINDS, already, RNCC!

And do you people even REALIZE that half the electorate wasn't born when Carter and Nixon were presidents? Or even Saint Reagan? Or Bush I?

They don't even get what you're talking about….

Comment by donna — June 24, 2008 @ 3:42 pm
The RNC and all their talking heads will do nothing but continue to whine and whine about every little thing they can, it's pretty obvious. I mean look how long they discussed the Michelle Obama unpatriotic issue, like it was so horrible, mind you they conveniently leave out a word here and there. Suddenly Dan Abrams airs a video on MSNBC of McCain saying the same thing about not loving America until he was cooped up with the Vietnamese. None of the other news stations mention the video but notice the RNC along with John/Cindy McCAin ain't talking about it anymore. Guess why?

Comment by Fitz — June 24, 2008 @ 3:48 pm
"Obama made verbal and written promises to accept public financing in the general election campaign if his Republican opponent would agree to do the same"

So the smoking gun should come in two parts: evidence of the promises, and McCain having accepted public financing when he decided to reverse his decision. Because, iirc, McCain was sort of shilly-shallying himself.

Given the reversal of disparity between the RNC and the DNC, I wonder if Obama would even be competitive had he accepted public financing?

Comment by Johnny Canuck — June 24, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
He answered "yes" on a questionnaire asking if he would consider public financing and then he wrote a couple of paragraphs outlining under what circumstances he would do it. The answer clearly said that he would do it if he could come to an agreement with his opponent on how to do it. He tried to come to an agreement with Mc'Cain, but Mc'Cain refused to promise to stop 527's. So, since there was no agreement, there was nothing for Obama to go back on.

I am so sick and tired of the MSM reporting inaccurately on this issue. The only accurate reporting on this issue has come from Keith Olbermann.

Comment by August — June 24, 2008 @ 4:25 pm
This is a bit pansy on the part of Obama to break a promise he made. However, this is not a game and the stakes are too high to supposedly 'play fair' with the GOP, whom has shown zero honor themselves in the past 8 years. Why should our candidate tie his own hands behind his back when we know the republicans would do the same if they had the option.

Comment by Ipsos — June 24, 2008 @ 4:44 pm
Apparently Rep. Cole does not understand Nixon. His facile awarding the Nixon moniker to Obama shows either invincible ignorance or a Nixonian penchant for character assination.

Rep. Cole, I knew Richard Nixon and Barack Obama is no Richard Nixon.

Comment by Jack Harty — June 24, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
I have to conclude that the republicans are jealous of Obama. Why else would they make a big deal out of this nonissue? Their complaints only serve to emphasize the fact that McCain can't raise the money except through a government handout. Obama is using the most public of funding possible, with the public actually doing the funding.

Comment by CDW — June 24, 2008 @ 4:49 pm
it would help if cole got his facts straight. Obama never promised to take public financing. He promised to "agressively pursue and agreement" with the republican nominee.

Seeing as how John McCain is not interested in reigning in 527s (unlike Obama who has instructed donors NOT to donate money to these organizations, and several have shut down at Obama's request) it was pretty clear that McCain didn't want an agreement.

Comment by JB — June 24, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
Omigosh, the Republicans are so panicking they are throwing even their party heroes under the Crooked-Talk Express! Obama like Nixon? That's like saying Bush is like Einstein. Or even like the average keg-drinking undergraduate. McSame accepted public funding and used it as collateral for a bank loan to finance his primary race, then turned around and rejected that same public funding. He was counting on Obama to roll over, play nice and be willie hortoned to death by RNC and Swift-boat mutli-godzillions. "I cannot control these ad" McSame now is crying that Obama is a pragmatic, shrewd, play-to-win opponent? Super Flip-flopper McBush was for ending tax breaks to the super-rich, now he's for keeping them. He was against off-shore drilling, now he's for them. He was against inhumane immigration controls, now he's for them. He was against torture, now he's for them. He want "to pass the beer, uh ….bills" when he cannot give a coherent speech. Say no to dementia, to "f*** you temper tantrums, to calling your wife a "C**T". Go Obama 08, and let's throw the total-disaster Bush regime and McSame's third term under the Straight Democracy Express.

Comment by lin — June 24, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
It is an insult for Cole to compare Obam with Nixon. Interestingly, lies got Nixon in trouble and Cole is lying in that he misquotes Obama's position of public financing. The Republicans are all alike!

Comment by La Forest Faulkner — June 24, 2008 @ 5:04 pm
"The only accurate reporting on this issue has come from Keith Olbermann."

LOL, Obama's biggest fan accurately reporting anything is a laugh. Obama is opting out of public financing because he can spend more money this way. He should of just said that instead of that lying "they made me do it" excuse he made.

Comment by DE — June 24, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
This is the best they Cole can do. . . . GOPocalypse indeed.

Comment by Ed G — June 24, 2008 @ 5:43 pm
And Republicans take no responsibility for McCain's ILLEGAL blunder on the same issue. If the Republicans don't still reek of the elitist stink of Nixon, I don't know what does. Republicans will lie, cheat, steal and do whatever it takes to win, all the while claiming they have the corner on "morality". It's an offense to America. And the last 8 years have been filled with WAR CRIMES and more. How about the NRCC addressing that?!

Comment by Bruce — June 24, 2008 @ 5:44 pm
The MSM and the republicans think americans are stupid. I guess becuse we don't deminstrate, march, or complain until such time that our lack of participation comes home to roost! To Mr. Cole and the rest of GOP, we americans read, write and understand what is going on. Our mission is not just winning the White House, but destroying the party that destoryed our nation. It's time to even the score. KEITH OBERMAN is the only one in the media telling it, like it is. The truth hurts but at leaset Keith realized that if we can't handle the truth, how are we going to get this nation back from the barron robbers.

Comment by Claude — June 24, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
The Democrats picked the biggest crook they could find from one of the most corrupt cities in America, had a shame primary, and hoisted this selection as The One. Rezko, Ayers, Wright, Davis, Levine, Sinclair, Pfleger, NOI, etc…. too much to choose from.
Nobama.

Comment by Bigtime — June 24, 2008 @ 6:07 pm
Claude , take a breath, you are delusional.

Comment by Bigtime — June 24, 2008 @ 6:08 pm
**Obama is too smart for you guys. Admit that it makes you INSANE. (Well, maybe you were halfway there already).

Comment by greylox — June 24, 2008 @ 6:14 pm
Apparently, Representative Tom Cole doesn't have any idea what Nixon did, or to what "Nixonian" commonly refers. Perhaps a simple primer for Rep. Cole will help. First, President Nixon abused the Constitution and claimed it didn't matter because the President was above the law. Hmmm, this sounds eerily familiar as our current President has and does claim he, too, is above the law and the Constitution. Second, President Nixon actively cultivated the sympathy vote and tried to get Americans to vote for him out of pity. Hmmm, Senator McCain has and is trying for the sympathy vote already. You see, Rep. Cole, there are Republican Nixonian traits out there, but not in Senator Obama, rather in both our current President and the GOP standard bearer, Senator McCain.

Comment by Kim — June 24, 2008 @ 6:21 pm
Nixonian huh? Then what do you call BushCo? Opting out of public financing is what they should all do and run on the people giving - that's democracy folks.

Comment by Jey — June 24, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
You've got to love the American polity. Look, I'm an old fashioned FDR brand Democrat and will vote for Obama. But, I refuse to drink his kool-aid. Many seem to forget, he can't wait to get his mitts on Hillary's fat cat (money elite-lobbyist) donor base. Thus, the integrating of her fund raisers into his campaign….Big money remains the mother’s milk of politics and the Gnomes of Wall Street are always in the shadows, regardless of the party and candidate.

As to McCain and his campaign spending quagmire, he can't get his case in front of the election committee for a ruling. We Dems won't vote on the nominees, so that a full committee can be seated, put forth by the Administration. Just good old fashioned politics, and it keeps McCain in that glass jar.

Let's look at the cold hard facts, and not through the eyes from a drunken stupor: Obama kool-aid.

Comment by Eisai — June 24, 2008 @ 6:38 pm
"Bigtime," I agree with "greylox" - Obama is too smart and too likable…it's making people like you insane!! Besides, let's not go down the "crook"ed lane. Last I checked, the BIGGEST crooks in political history are affiliated with the current administration.

Comment by Gobama! — June 24, 2008 @ 6:43 pm
IT IS JOHN McCAIN WHO ACTED NIXON LIKE, JOHN McCAIN ACTUALLY BROKE THE LAW WHEN HE OPTED OUT OF PUBLIC FINANCING, WHICH HE ACCEPTED IN FALL 2007, JOHN McCAIN EVEN SIGNED LOAN PAPERS AND RECEIVED $2 MILLION DOLLARS FROM A BANK, WITH THE PROMISE, AND SIGNATURE ON THE LOAN, THAT HE WOULD REMAIN IN PUBLIC FINANCING, BUT AFTER RECEIVING THE LOAN FROM THE BANK, JOHN McCAIN DECIDED TO OPT OUT OF THE PUBLIC FINANCING, BREAKING THE LAW, AND COMMITTING A CRIME, SINCE HE HAD BORROWED MONEY FROM A BANK.

JOHN McCAIN IS THE NIXON, THE CROOK, WHO FRAUDULANTLY SIGNED LOAN PAPERS AND RECEIVED $2 MILLION DOLLARS FROM A BANK, AND THEN BROKE HIS CONTRACTS WITH BOTH: THE BANK, AND PUBLIC FINANCING.

McCain opted INTO the public financing system for the primaries, which meant he'd later receive just over $5 million in public funds in exchange for agreeing to a fundraising limit of around $54 million for the entire primary process, which ends with the nomination at the Republican National Convention in September.

But in November, John McCain's campaign was practically broke, so McCain took out $2 million dollar loans, using the public funds he would receive as COLLATERAL.
Then when McCain won the Republican nomination, suddenly, John McCain didn't want to be bound by that $54 million limit he had agreed to, so JOHN McCAIN OPTED BACK OUT of public financing. AND BROKE THE LAW IN THE PROCESS.

JOHN McCAIN COMMITTED A CRIME.

NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED BY OBAMA

Comment by Sara — June 24, 2008 @ 6:50 pm
It was George Bush who opted out of public financing. You need to check your facts and not just regurgitate what the RNC says.

Comment by afgail — June 24, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
Please…this is a non-issue. I thought most Repubs were against public finance of campaigns anyway. Only about 10% of Americans check the box on their tax returns to have money go to this cause. So obviously most Americans do not want campaigns to be funded by tax dollars. The repubs are simply using this as political posturing saying Obama broke his word. Why don't they explain to me why McCain broke his word on issues that really matter, like CIA torture, tax cuts for the wealthy, and why he didn't support the GI bill?

Comment by Lindsay K — June 24, 2008 @ 7:36 pm
This is getting kind of old. True Obama supporters is not going to hold this against him. He needs all the money he can get to fight those rupublicans. Everybody know they don't fight fair. Most people are tired of their old lame politics and attacks. Not this time. Change is coming to America.

Comment by Eve — June 24, 2008 @ 8:48 pm
wow.. thats so weird.. Id swear that Nixon was a republican… corrupt just like many of them have been found to be… sooooo sorry… I just dont see it.. not even a nice try.. just a big fat flop…

Comment by Levi Cro — June 24, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
Bush makes Nixon look like a saint.

Comment by Will — June 24, 2008 @ 9:47 pm
Karl Rove: "Obama's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."

Tom Cole: "Exactly he's Nixonian to the core"

Tom Cole is Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC)

Comment by Plus15 — June 24, 2008 @ 10:00 pm
As to McCain and his campaign spending quagmire, he can't get his case in front of the election committee for a ruling. We Dems won't vote on the nominees, so that a full committee can be seated, put forth by the Administration. Just good old fashioned politics, and it keeps McCain in that glass jar.
Comment by Eisai — June 24, 2008 @ 6:38 pm

Eisai,
Actually there is a hell of a lot more at stake than making McCain look bad. The reason the nominees have not been voted on is because the bush administration insists on putting up the most criminal, far right, vote suppressing goons to man the committee. It would be suicide to approve them. The GOP vote suppressing guru himself, Hans A von Spakovsky, was nominated to the committee. Gee, do you think there would be avalanche of pro GOP rulings in Nov 08 if we let these clowns get their hands on the power of the law… Uh Huh. Methinks the GOP has set this up so heads they win tails they win. If we approve, the screw us silly, if we don't approve, they whine in front of the media.
Just filling a fellow democrat in on the real story there Eisai. Obama's hope flavored kool aid got nothing to do with this can of gop maggots.

Comment by Northern Observer — June 24, 2008 @ 10:45 pm
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Obama_spokesman_Public_financing_just_an_option.html

Comment by John — June 24, 2008 @ 10:54 pm
Oh, the irony of it all–a Republican sucking off the tit of government to get into the White House, while the Democrat opts for the free market. Shame on John McCain for taking government handouts! LOL!!!

Comment by NotesFromME — June 24, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
LOL Nixonian means doing anything to get elected. You know like flip flopping on offshore oil drilling instead of being honest with the people that we need a real energy policy for the future. McBush was doing back flips, flip flopping on the Bush tax cute, torture, Guantanimo bay, marriage amendment, comprehensive immigration reform, Falwell agents of intolerants, etc…

McBush said he was going to use public financing as collateral to get a loan before the primaries but then decided he didn't need public financing so he got the loan under false pretenses. McBush would flip flop on any issue to get just one more vote.

Comment by KQuark — June 24, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
Obama is a smart politician. He would be stupid to accept Government money. I thought you Republicans hated big government. I thought you encouraged private enterprise. Your candidate has changed nearly every position he had except for the war (no need to change there because he was already wrong on that issue). Win at any cost? Sounds more like "Maverick" than Senator Obama.

Comment by RoboA — June 25, 2008 @ 1:13 am
I think Obama clearly stated that he was for maintaing public finance, however he did stipulate only if he could work out an agreement with the Republican nominee, McCain has not pursued discussion pertaining to an agreement either. So if Obama is to be blamed so must McCain.

Comment by SKG — June 24, 2008 @ 2:41 pm stated

the facts accurately and I agree completely.
Talking about flip flops you should view McCains greatest hits on You Tube. The Republicans are afraid and grasping at straws, because on the issues Obama wins.

Comment by James — June 25, 2008 @ 3:17 am
He never made written promises to take public financing.

Tom Cole - You sir, are a liar.

Contrast this with McCain - who has broken his own campaign finance law (a FELONY which could send him to JAIL) in a two CATCH-ALL METHODs - he either secured a loan based on public financing and then illegally pulled out of public financing (which requires a quorum of the FEC that doesn't exist), or he wasn't able to pull out of public financing (what the FEC chair says) without a quorum of the FEC, and is now spending far over his limits.

Whether he's broken the law and committed a felony is not in technical dispute - which law he broke is. That will have to wait for the FEC to reach a quorum and decide whether he was able to withdraw from the commission without their permission.

Comment by JakeBal — June 25, 2008 @ 3:19 am
There are many things about Nixon that I liked:
1. He opened up diplomatic relations with China.
2. He proposed several acts to benefit the working class Americans.
3. He was truthful and properly restrained in those debates on such issues as the (nonexisting!) missile gap.
4. He was more loyal than recent presidents who have hidden their wrong doing behind subordinates.

In fact, Nixon was a much better president than many who got better press..

AND OBAMA will be good for the country, in spite of the hateful and bigoted Right.

Comment by BuckBurris — June 25, 2008 @ 7:31 am
Here's an article that contains the facts, rather than the author's spin.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200806200007

Here is one example of what Obama said:

……

Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. I introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and am the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold's (D-WI) bill to reform the presidential public financing system. In 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. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election. The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and 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.

……..

Obama agreed to public financing, if McCain would agree as well, but that limited outside spending by 527s too. Obama and McCain discussed it and couldn't come to an agreement, so Obama did not opt in for the financing.

Unlike McCain, Obama and the DNC are not taking money from PACs and lobbyists, he is funded by the American people. Following Obama's lead, MoveOn has shut down it's 527 division.

This article is just spin that mangles Obama's words.

Comment by Kiku — June 25, 2008 @ 8:02 am
I voted three times for Richard Nixon, and except for the Watergate debacle, I still think he was a pretty good president. I find it rather odd that a Republican would now be using a comparison with Nixon to attack a Democratic candidate, but then, I find a lot of what the Republicans have been doing these past seven or eight years odd… so I am voting for Obama and hoping he is at least as good a president as Richard Nixon was. I have no such hope for John McCain.

Comment by Lou — June 25, 2008 @ 8:19 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Blogroll

June 24, 2008

Cole Says Obama Is 'Nixonian to the Core'

60 Comments »

Leave a comment