« Guantanamo Bay series | Main | Old enough for war but not P&L »

June 26, 2008

McCain’s campaign funds

Ed Robertson (6/23, Letters) writes that if John McCain had reversed his position on the use of public funds as Barack Obama did, The Star would have used the term “flipped-flopped” to describe his actions.

Where has Mr. Robertson been these last several months? In the fall of 2007, McCain opted into the public financing system for the GOP primaries, which meant he’d later receive just over $5 million in public funds in exchange for agreeing to a fundraising limit of about $54 million for the entire primary process. The primary process doesn’t end until McCain accepts the nomination at the Republican National Convention in September.

By late November 2007, his campaign was practically broke, so McCain took out a pair of $1 million loans, using as collateral the public funds he would receive. After McCain had the Republican nomination all but sewn up, he decided he didn’t want to be bound by the $54 million limit. He did a 180 and opted out of the public financing system.

Mr. Robertson is probably not aware of this because the so-called “liberal mainstream media” is bending over backward to help McCain get elected.

M. L. Stone



JIm - obvously you have not looke dinto the tuition including housing of most State colleges. The problem with the tax crediot is again, only CERTAIN people will "qualify". You will have to be of a certain income bracket (of shich they do not include the tax free handouts many receive), you will have to be of a certain marital status and gender. Otherwise, you will get nothing. Have you ever dealt with FAFSA? What a great "program", they make you wait until 10 days before schools starts to let you know if you "qaulify" for a Ford Direct at 8.5% payable starting 60 days after disbursment. Government should stay out of higher education unless it is going to be efficient and fair to all not just "minorities".



You're deliberately twisting obama's words by misrepresenting his proposal. His proposal is and always has been a $4,000 tax credit for eligible families that would pay 2/3 of the tuition for most colleges and universities. He's also proposed simplifying the financial aid application process by getting rid of the application and allowing people to apply by checking a box on their tax forms, since the application uses all the same info anyway.

That's not "free government paid tuition" as you have classified it. The only people obama supports free tuition for are our war veterans, who have deinitely earned it. Mccain was too busy to even vote on that bill, but I see that, after berating it, he's now taking credit for getting it passed.

As mccain himself would say, "that's not change we can believe in."

Pub 17

...incidentally, if you still think that calling someone a liberal is going to cause the mob to get a rope, you must have been asleep for the last seven years.

Pub 17

For Gods sake go to his website and see the policy he proposes. He proposes ASSISTING with college tuition via a tax credit, the same way you ASSIST businesses with tax credits. Since I got most of my college from the G. I. Bill, I suppose I'm guilty of accepting welfare. Take out the cork.


Pub 17
I heard him say it. In fact I have heard him say things concerning college tuition at least twice. On other occasions, whatever his actual words may be, he is selling the idea of something for nothing. He has said, and I heard him say it, that he will take the oil company profits and give them to people to pay their heating bills. He is said to have the most liberal voting record in the Senate. What he says in his speeches bears out this mind set.

Pub 17

Your statement that "He has said that he will have the Government pay for college tuition for all who want to go," is outrageous and false. Please stop making things up as you go along.


On some things there seems to be little difference in their stands, One big difference is on taxes. Obama has stated he will make a major increase in the capital gains tax, perhaps to as high as 25%. This will impact many of the "middle class" about which he has expressed so much concern. He has indicated he would remove the "cap" on Social Security "contribution" which would be a tax increase of 6.2% for everyone making a salary of over $102,000 in 2008. Or a tax increase of 12.4% if you consider that the employee in effect pays both parts of the SS tax. He has said that he will have the Government pay for college tuition for all who want to go, that he will remove all taxes on this or that group and that he will get the money to do all of this by raising the FIC on those making &250.000 or more. Of course he cannot do these things by himself but it appears that if elected he may well have a Congress to which he can dictate. This will be change for sure, but change in just the wrong direction.



First, I've never said Obama wasn't a politician. It seems rather obvious that someone involved in politics is. If you're expecting me to admit to being crushed by the "breaking news" that Obama is a politician, you're going to be disappointed. I've never denied that in the first place.

Second, the "McSame" reference wasn't from me, it was from whispering_to_kc. Take that up with him/her.

Third, while I know that candidates for president will sometimes moderate their views during a campaign, the context is important. No candidate is a solid rock on every issue, nor should he be. My problem with McCain is that he is making numerous sloppy and unprincipled flip flops, many on the core issues that gave him his so-called "maverick" status. When asked about them, he either denies it altogether or says "it's different." Either way, he never feels the need to explain his change in views, as if people wanting to know his rationale are some kind of nuisance.


You still haven't addressed your own admission that "Most candidates go to the center during the general, especially when independents are in play in such large numbers." By joining the ranks of "most politicians" and heading towards center to pick up more votes, he has shown that postion and principle are secondary to votes.

I'm not saying he's the only one doing it (insert your "but McCain did it worse" comment here). All I'm saying is that he's just another politician. Heck, you may be right. He may be the best politician in the race (insert your McSame in 2008 comment here), but at the end of the day, he's still just another politician.


Kate, all that proves is that Obama is pragmatic and is not the doctrinairre liberal you guys are trying (and failing) to cast him as. Suddenly he's not allowed to agree with anything conservative justices say, ever?

More of your sorry narratives keep falling flat. Yesterday Sam Brownback accused Obama of being a phony on bipartisanship, only to be totally embarrassed by the reminder that he's bragged about working with Obama on legislation on several occasions.


And then there's Gordon Smith's new commercial:



McSame dumped his first wife to marry into a rich beer family. His rich second wife could fund two or three election campaigns all by herself.

Something else we don't hear much about in the liberal mainstream media.

McSame in 2008? Four more years.


Regarding Obama’s rightward path, another cynic put it this way, “If only the Court could overturn Roe before the election, Obama would become a pro-lifer.” http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzI1NTE2YWU1YzNiOGRhMGJkNjFhYzE2M2MxZDI1NGY=


"Most candidates go to the center during the general..."

Most would include Obama, correct? So, he is playing the "same" political game, shifting his views dependant upon what point in the campaign he is in. Sounds like politics as usual to me.

Again, I don't hate Obama. I just think it's funny how many "Obamamaniacs" won't admit that their "change" candidate seem to be showing himself more of a typical politician. Like I said yesterday, he's a good speaker with a timely slogan, but a politician none the less.


Most candidates go to the center during the general, especially when independents are in play in such large numbers. I think the "enthusiasm gap" will play a part, especially since McCain's attempts to tack to the center while simultaneously tacking to the right are simply untenable. Last week, he held a closed-door meeting in Chicago with Hispanics and touted comprehensive immigration reform - the kind he sponsored a few years ago and said he wouldn't vote for just a few months ago. His staff failed to notice that they'd invited a member of the Minutemen who was none too pleased:



McCain was supposed to be different. Obama was supposed to be different. To this point, we seem to be getting more of the same. You may argue that McCain's "same" is worse than Obama's "same", and it may be, but that doesn't change the fact that the "same" we're getting isn't the "different" we were promised.

Perspective is in the eye of the beholder. In my eye, both McCain and Obama are proving themselves to be far short of their initial hype. I may be the only person who sees it this way, but I doubt it.

Any reaction to the centrist shift that we seem to be seeing from both candidates?


Nice try. There's a huge difference between the two. Did Obama change his position? Yes, he did.

But McCain is breaking the law, plain and simple. Obama is not. No matter how hard you try to equate the two, they are not the same.

McCain was supposed to be different. He was supposed to be the "maverick straight talker" who took on Washington and stuck to his convictions no matter what. Now it's clear he's just another dishonest politician who can't even follow his own law.


The tune would be "Changing Your Mind About Campaign Finaince", to be sung in the key of D-minor. McCain changed his mind during the primaries, Obama changed his for the general election. The fact is, they both changed their mind, and both seem to have done it by sacrificing the ideal of "responsible financing" at the alter of the almighty dollar.

Again, I think that what we are seeing is that Obama is just another politician. It doesn't mean that he is evil, or that he may not be better suited for the White House than McCain, it just means that he is probably not the agent of change he claims to be.

The next few months will be interesting. Typically, candidates move as far to the extreme of their party as possible to win the nomination, then towards the center during the general election to appeal to the largest number of voters. I believe we'll continue to see a "re-thinking" of both candidates previous positions in order to make themselves more appealing to the masses.

Good news for you though, Jim. On NPR this morning, I heard a study that indicated that democrats are more "excited" about their candidate then the republicans are at a ration of 2:1. The editorialist seemed to think that this would mean that democrats would be more willing to tolerate a centrist shift by Obama than repulicans would by McCain. I tend to agree.


What toon would that be? The truth? Everything in this letter is well-documented and true. McCain has no ground to stand on when he gets preachy about campaign finance. This has been his signature issue for years, and the fact that he's literally broken his own law is astounding.

As usual with McCain, the hypocrisy is so thick, you can cut it with a knife.


Same tune, different words...

About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright