Lobbyists and PACs

[MDM4AU 336]

I keep hearing the Obama faithful touting his "refusal" to accept donations from lobbyists or PAC contributions. RIR63 posted an article just a couple of days ago, by Dick Morris that read, "He began his candidacy eschewing donations from PACs and lobbyists, preserving his purity and giving him ground on which to stand in his claim to represent a new kind of politics, rejecting the special interests."

USA Today (2/27/08) reports that "Obama does not accept PAC contributions or donations from lobbyists, though he does accept contributions from business partners of lobbyists and from employees of the interests they represent." It goes on to say that Obama has received over $400K from employees of the brokerage firm, Goldman Sachs and that 4 of Obama's top 5 sources for "campaign money" are Wall Street Banks and Brokerages.

Is this not just a case of semantics?

[DKW 86 7,441]

Why I get what you are saying, and I understand autigeremt's post on Obama's Church, I think attacking the man is not going to work. Look, I dont define him as "PURE," sure I agree with that. But in the 21st Century America, these two candidates are about as good as we are going to get with regards to PAC money strings/ties.

If McCain is to beat Obama he must do it on the issues. A lot of America is going to take a long look at Obama after he does in Hillary/The Clintons on 3-4-08. (That actually felt good to write that. )

Where is Obama weak? On Economics issues, and Iraq. Obama may be untouchable because of his race on some issues. McCain is also untouchable on a few due to his War Record and time in the Senate. Once Hillary is done, Obama is going to get an exploratory enema from the media. The closer the voters look, the more they may find they dont like about his stances on some issues. From 3-4-08 until November is a LONG time for reporters to uncover ugly stories and embarass him. Just look at Michelle Obama's slip up.

I dont have a clue, but there are going to be issues with his parents. There are going to be more issues with his church (which I really dont have too many problems with other than Farakhan and Sharpton awards, but Obama seems to realize he had to shut that up now, and appears to have done so last night.) His voting record will be a major issue. Voting "present" so many times will take time to explain on certain votes. Taking time to explain anything bores most voters to death. Just ask John Kerry.

McCain will have to get someone to give him cover to point out problems with Obama. Limbaugh types and some folks in the media would be my guess. Snerdly (on Limbaugh) is devastatingly funny criticizing Obama now. Yall remember the point back in 1984 when a sleepy, old man named Reagan, after a bad first debate, told Mondale that "I am not going to let my opponent's youth and inexperience be a factor?" Well, McCain needs just a few of those moments, not pointed, but funny and non-threatening, to swing the campaign for him. Obama has "Hope for the Future" and a lot of semingly meaningless words and not really much in substance and a weak voting record. Hell, dont we all have "Hope for the Future?" That doesnt mean we are all qualified to be president.

Obama, just has to run a solid campaign, no major gaffes, etc and answer a few charges and the White House is his.

[MDM4AU 336]

I'm not attacking him. I just wonder if anyone else sees this the way I do or if I'm missing something.

Right, wrong or indifferent, every candidate will get support from special interests. It's how Washington works. Turn your nose up completely to these interests and you will have a short stay in the beltway. If the interests can't get to you directly, they'll go through the ranking party members they have on the take to lean on you. That is sad, too. Because it means noting will change or will change so slowly that most of us on this board won't be around to see it.