Kondracke falsely claimed Obama would be "violating a promise" by "forgoing public financing ... between now and August"
SUMMARY: On The Beltway Boys, Mort Kondracke conflated primary election and general election funding, falsely asserting that Sen. Barack Obama will be "violating a promise" if he "forgo[es] public financing ... between now and August" -- that is, during the primary. In fact, Obama did not pledge to accept public funds during the primary, and long ago opted out of public financing for the primary election. Rather, he has said that he will attempt to reach an agreement with Sen. John McCain to use public financing in the general election.
On the February 23 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys, co-host and Roll Call executive editor Morton M. Kondracke conflated primary election and general election funding, falsely asserting that Sen. Barack Obama will be "violating a promise" if he "forgo[es] public financing ... between now and August" -- that is, during the primary. In fact, Obama did not pledge to accept public funds during the primary, and long ago opted out of public financing for the primary election. Regarding the general election, Obama wrote in response to a Midwest Democracy Network questionnaire, issued in September 2007: "If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."
Obama recently confirmed in a February 20 USA Today op-ed that "I will aggressively pursue such an agreement if I am my party's nominee," and added:
I do not expect that a workable, effective agreement will be reached overnight. The campaign-finance laws are complex, and filled with loopholes that can render meaningless any agreement that is not solidly constructed.
[...]
I propose a meaningful agreement in good faith that results in real spending limits. The candidates will have to commit to discouraging cheating by their supporters; to refusing fundraising help to outside groups; and to limiting their own parties to legal forms of involvement. And the agreement may have to address the amounts that Senator McCain, the presumptive nominee of his party, will spend for the general election while the Democratic primary contest continues.
Kondracke made the remark while suggesting that if Obama broke the "promise," he would put McCain at a disadvantage, because McCain "may be forced to ... keep getting public financing all of the way through his convention in September," and would therefore not be able to spend as much money as Obama. However, Kondracke did not provide a major reason why McCain "may be forced" to use public funds until the Republican National Convention. As the Associated Press reported on February 21, Federal Election Commission Chairman David Mason has said that McCain may not be allowed to leave the public financing system if it is found that he "use[d] the promise of public money to help secure a $4 million line of credit he obtained in November [2007]," when his campaign was low on funds. As Media Matters for America has documented, McCain entered into a loan contract in which he agreed to remain a candidate under certain circumstances, even if he had no chance of winning, to qualify for public money to pay back the loan.
From the February 23 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys:
KONDRACKE: Now, there's one other problem that McCain may have, and that's money. He may be forced to take -- to keep getting public financing all of the way through his convention in September, which doesn't leave him a lot of money. Meanwhile, Barack Obama, violating a promise if he does it, is talking about forgoing public financing, which is going to give him oodles of money --
FRED BARNES (co-host): Yeah.
KONDRACKE: -- to spend between now and August.
BARNES: Yeah, money is important, but a snooze.
Another episode in missrepresenting what a Democrat said... It's a pity that these folks are too old to have benefitted from Bush's No Child Left Behind program as their reading comprehension skills obviously leave much to be desired. ;>)
reading comprehension skills in No Child Left Behind?
That must be Irony ;)
Well ding dang blasted to blazes. The trouble ain't in the piles and it ain't in my piles. Let them drink cake! D*mn the whole stumbling middle class. They don't have to have any brains,....so I don't have to have any brains either! Go mess arround with that one in the desert.
Stressed is just desserts spelled backwards.
And...
"Lew, Otto has a hot towel," is "Lew, Otto has a hot towel," spelled backwards.
Coincidence? or conspiracy?
BARNES: Yeah, money is important, but a snooze.
Is there a definition of snooze out there that is just not in my vocabulary? Someone explain what this means or what he is saying by this comment? - seriously
Media Matters is too slick. They had an opportunity to write a similar article against the USA Today, which a few days ago expressed its view that Obama waffled on campaign financing. But see, Kondracke is a biased wingnut, and it is easier to go after him. Plus we can't be told that a prestigious newspaper does not think everything Saint Obama says is A-Ok.
USA Today, 2-20-08:
Sen. Barack Obama sells himself as the candidate of "change," the candidate of reform, the man who'll shake up Washington's business-as-usual mentality.
But before the Illinois Democrat has even gotten on the November ballot, he is waffling on one of his earliest reform pledges: to pursue public financing rather than gather money from high rollers and special interests if he is his party's nominee.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/02/our-view-on-cam.html
Thanks Truthseeker...
Hey USA Today, read my first post..you get a mulligan too, you Conservative RightWing rag.
MMFA "goes after" USA Today all the time. There was just a USA Today story on the 21st. Depending on who you are or what your views are, MMFA either "missed one" or would be nitpicking. This sort of argument happens around here all the time - I'm as guilty of the double standard as anyone.
If you ask me, despite even my occasional charges or questioning of stories - I think MMFA is much more balanced in selecting the stories that stick to their mission statement than anyone ever gives them credit.
"Media Matters is too slick....
Plus we can't be told that a prestigious newspaper does not think everything Saint Obama says is A-Ok."
There's just a couple of facts that are at odds with your allegation of favoritism toward USA Today:
MMFA relies in part on receiving tips from readers. Did you tip them on the USA Today article when you saw it?
Since inception, MMFA has presented 91 separate items that directly or indirectly cite USA Today, including one from late January that meets the criteria you mention.
My guess is that Mort Kondracke is confused about primary vs. general election spending, and wasn't intentionally trying to deceive.
Obama promised to use public financing in the general election. I think that Obama is a man of his word and he will do what he promised.
No, he promised to "pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."
His statement was clear. If Obama tries to weasel out of his committment to public financing then he will be no better than his opponents.
I support Obama because I think that he IS a man of integrity. Are you trying to convince me otheriwise?
I support Obama
And I'm the Queen of Sheba.
Why am I the only one at MMFA who takes Obama at his word and actually gives Obama credit for having integrity?
Does the Queen of Sheba think that Obama is going to keep his promise?
I have no doubt that he will pursue an agreement with McCain for public financing during the general election.
Why are you pretending to support Obama?