Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

McCain Raises Money the Hard Way

By Michael D. Shear
John McCain's campaign treated the news of Barack Obama abandoning the public financing system with the expected disdain, calling it evidence that Obama is "just another typical politician who will do and say whatever is most expedient for Barack Obama."

But the comment may be tinged with more than a bit of envy.

McCain's fundraising has improved dramatically since he secured the nomination in early March. But unlike Obama, he's had to do it the very hard way, slogging through fundraiser after fundraiser, shaking hand after hand.

By the count of some reporters who trail him daily, McCain has attended more than 90 fundraisers since March 5, flying around the country to court high-rollers in hotels and private homes.

The fundraisers are time consuming, usually entailing a small reception for the biggest donors followed by a larger luncheon or dinner for a bigger group. There's almost always a line of people who get a photo with the candidate.

On Monday, for example, McCain held a fundraiser at the the Belo Mansion in Dallas, followed Tuesday by one at the San Antonio Country Club and then two more at private homes in the River Oaks area of Houston.

Total take: more than $4 million.

McCain's advisers have indicated it's almost certain he will accept public financing for the general election. For McCain to match Obama's almost effortless fundraising would require him to spend almost all of his time at fundraisers -- not the way he wants to spend the final two months after the conventions.

By Web Politics Editor  |  June 19, 2008; 11:30 AM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , Barack Obama , John McCain , The Green Zone  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Opts Out of Public Financing
Next: Obama Launches Nationwide Ad Campaign

Comments

McCain can still raise as much money as he can on his own until the RNC and recieve public financing for the gereral election because it is still considered for the primary untill he is officially named the Republican canidate. Also, the Republican Party can still raise money on its own to use toward getting they're canidate elected. While Obama supporters will be giving his campaign money directly McCain can recieve money from individuals through the Republican Party while also reciving the public money.

Posted by: RJ | June 21, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

To understand the fund raising situation, one need only look at the constituencies that the candidate supports. For McCain, the terrorist prisoners he wants to protect in Gitmo simply don't have the money or interest in our politics; the green weenies have already given their money to Gore; the illegal immigrants have sent their money back to Mexico; the citizens whose free speech was curtailed by McCain-Feingold have found other things to invest in; and Republican office holders need every cent they can get to get reelected after having become the big spenders they used to oppose. Maybe the treasurer of the Renegade Party will come up with something.

Posted by: Jefferson John | June 20, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

"By the count of some reporters who trail him daily, McCain has attended more than 90 fundraisers since March 5, flying around the country to court high-rollers in hotels and private homes."

If this is true, guess who McCain has to answer to if he becomes Prez: HIGH ROLLERS. I know of no "high-rollers" who can't pay for their healthcare, lost their jobs, or are fighting/dying in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Posted by: CRE8SENSE | June 20, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

If you want to see someone able to manage a campaign, just look to the Obama camp. While HRC was going around spending money like a drunken sailor (note: "The Hill-a-copter, etc.), Sen. Obama was using his contributions to help build a grassroots coalition. Has John McCain done that? Yes, the arrogance of old politics as usual was the downfall of Sen. Clinton and it will be the undoing of Sen. McCain.

He and his cronies can try to demonize the Obama family and everyone around them but it won't work! I am not a Hillary hater or a McCain hater. I just realize that there's a new sheriff in town - and his name is Barack Obama. All of the name calling in the world will not change the fact that this man is an organizer/manager and will put good people around him to help change our downwards-spiraling circumstances for the better.

No one in their right mind would have the taxpayers front their campaign if they can do it without the big lobbyists and corporations; simply by asking the "little man/woman" for their donations to a cause. Now that is truly a voluntary publicly financed campaign. Face it, the old guard is out - it's time for a new guard. Obama '08!!!

Posted by: mnstr4jc | June 20, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

But unlike Obama, he's had to do it the very hard way, slogging through fundraiser after fundraiser, shaking hand after hand.
But unlike Obama, he married a billionaire to take up the slack.

Posted by: mzbond | June 20, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

It just shows that obama and his new friends are craftier and more underhanded then McCain......what a shock!

Posted by: Danielle | June 20, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Come on we all know that McCain is gaming the system. Raising money privately while promising to stay within public financing? Why, would he be all over the place in this private homes raising money if he intends to seek public financing? Why has he not declared that he is staying within public financing? Here is the answer, If McCain manages to raise more than the 85 million available in public financing he will eskew public financing. However if he fails to reach that amount he intends to seek public financing.
The guy is still trying to figure out which pie is bigger. Just as he did in the primary's...walk the middle until the end game is decided upon.

Posted by: FM | June 20, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I am just going to write in Hillary's name on my ballot!!!!!, or I might not even vote. I would like to know how Obama got this far, I've never even heard of him and what experience does he have to become the commander in cheif. I surely don't want a President on hope. Our country is really in sad shape and we need a President with experience. Who know's, I might jump ship and vote for McCain.

Posted by: Westminster | June 20, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

By the way, I am not stating public funding I agree with-I am simply stating that obama did not keep his word-
If anything we need someone like Lou Dobbs to run for President-there is a petition online to ask him to run.
If you really want change-change in a good way to actually benefit the USA,ask Lou to run.
I dont know otherwise what we will do.
With obama running-it has stirred up so much negativity-I think we are all doomed if someone else doesnt run and win.....

Posted by: Danielle | June 20, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

If everyone would please take a moment to read Mr. Obama's "promise" earlier in the campaign season on the questionaire in debate. The last sentence reads something to the extent that he would vigerously attempt to pursue an aggreement with the Republican Nominee about campaign funding. Mr. Obama dispatched his attorney to the McCain camp repeatedly and had no success on getting an aggreement. OBAMA KEPT HIS PROMISE.

It's not like Mr. McCain never flip-flopped on this issue. He first agreed to accept public financing then started to raise private funds when it was politically expedient and then has opted back into public financing.

For all of you who didn't take the time to read the full response by Obama on the questionaire, please stop posting because you were too lazy to get the full story and actually find out for yourself that Obama actually kept his promise!

Posted by: David | June 20, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Running for president has become totally shameful. They waste so much money and yet people are being thrown out of their homes, loosing jobs to invaders, and now they want us to pay for their campaign with tax dollars when I wouldn't vote for either one of the TRAITORS. They are shakeing the American people down but if the mafia did that it would be called extortion. Polititions can get away with murder (just ask Kennedy), and I think it should come to an end. It's past time to get rid of the lobbist in Washington and All states, make the big banks pay as much intrest as they charge, and taxes. But it all comes back to the crooked politicans, letting them get away with it.
When are the American people going to get fed up with it, after it's too late and the Neo Natiz take the rest of our country?

Posted by: Vic Bailey | June 20, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

So what does the McCain camp mean by Obama is just like any other politician? Does that mean all politicians have been lying all this while (of course the public knows that), and if McCain is not accepting public funding why should Obama accept it? Just a thought that's all.

Posted by: stennis | June 20, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

If any of you are shocked that obama shifted-shame on you! This guy is shady shady shady and can not Steady his own cause!
McCain has every right to call it -obama DID NOT keep his word- and McCain has!
WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Posted by: Danielle | June 20, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

It is absurd to expect American citizens to pay for political campaigns via taxes.

Posted by: Michael | June 20, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

How is McCain eligible for public funds even though he is already raising private money for this fall's campaign? Will he return the tens of millions he has raised?

Posted by: Carl | June 20, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Shame on McCain for spending $80,000,000 of the tax payer's money. At least Obama is receiving money from those that want to see HIS presidency. McCain is a joke... so was his bill for campaign reform since it still allows outside groups to blast away at the opposition. Oh well. Sucks to be broke doesn't it Repubs? LOL

Posted by: Patrick | June 20, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

I can only imagine what Tim Russert would say about this. The whole point of the public financing system was that each candidate would spend the same amount of money with a cap. And then let the best candidate win.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 20, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

I don't care how much Obama can raise -- one estimate is half billion. What an incomprehensible waste of money in these economic times.

Why don't we just put up a 'for sale' sign for the presidency in front of the White House.

Posted by: janet | June 20, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

For my next Obama contribution, I am going to purchase another t shirt and a poster.

So far, I've probably put in a total of $600.00...I plan to contribute as much as I can....even I am amazed at how my many small contributions have added up...and I'm a military wife, imagine that!

Obama '08 - yes we can

Posted by: Candace | June 20, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

From what I understand, McCain's campaign has already been raising and spending funds for the general election, so therefore he has opted/cheated his way out of the "plan" anyway. Obama's campaign saw this for what it was, Republican engineering, and made a decision to opt out as well. The only difference is that McCain's campaign will use the tax payer money as well as money donated by individuals and coorporations. The agreement was to not use that money...so I guess that is where the lie took place?

Posted by: Tabitha | June 20, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Of those 1,040 services, of which Obama has NOT attended all of them(some people are just stupid) how many have you heard other than the 2 minute sound bite recycled over and over on Fox News?

Don't worry, I'll wait.

Posted by: Davio | June 20, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Sen. Obama changed his mind...that's the short and simple of it. He's not using public campaign financing after saying he would use it because...he changed his mind. Please! Everyone, even Republicans, can change his/her mind. It's allowed. I will now send in my small contribution to the Obama campaign.
Obama '08

Posted by: AlesterP | June 20, 2008 8:57 AM | Report abuse

McCain could actually have the advantage in taking public funds. After all, the voters should watch to see how McCain could budget and manage with less money.

In times of economic crisis, unemployment, housing foreclosures, high gas prices, inflation and high debt, the wiser politician is one who can manage money better.

The Obama campaign is proving they can waste more money. I want to see a potential president who can manage wisely with less. Don't you?

Posted by: politicalone | June 20, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Plagiarisms in Obama's book.

Posted by: Shocked | June 20, 2008 5:30 AM | Report abuse

Obama has lied to a lot of folks in Iowa. He said that he felt our pains and would renegotiate NAFTA. But this week he went back on his word during an interview for Fortune magazine. He lied to us. We'll remember this in November.

Posted by: Disappointed | June 20, 2008 5:29 AM | Report abuse

In 1972 I gave $25.00 to George McGovern and thus became a member of his "McGovern Million Member" Club. After the scandal that was Watergate, I diligently checked off on my IRS 1040 to donate to the Presidential Campaign Fund.

Year after year I checked the box...

Now that Senator Obama has bypassed public financing and thus in all likelihood ended public financing, I will not be checking that box. Senator Obama will have absolutely no credibility on any reform issue if he is elected president. He thus got a "twofer": killed public financing, and killed his own credibility.

How disappointing...

Posted by: Philip | June 20, 2008 12:55 AM | Report abuse

The man is just smart and it just pains a lot of people. I don't know why so much fuss about Obama since so many of you swear he is not going to win. Let him do what he does, apparently he knows something. It is a shame some of you just can't give the man any credit.

Posted by: Cheryl L | June 20, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse

I noticed how McShame was gathering private money the whole time since his nomination. Mr. Public Financing also has a problem with FEC and some underhanded doings he did back in the primaries.
Basically, if Obama went the PF route he would be getting slammed for being a fool to give up all that money coming from small donors on the internet.
So either way Obama would be criticized. Better to do so and at least have the money to fight McShame and gop and force the RNC to spend alot of that cash as well.
Who knows. Maybe he'll do them what he did to Hillary in Pennsylvania and bankrupt them.

Posted by: vwcat | June 20, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

MCCAIN IS RAISING MONEY THE HARDWAY. THE TRUTH IS MCCAIN HAS NEVER PLEDGE TO PUBLIC FINANCING AND HE'S BEEN GAMING THE SYSTEM SINCE THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES. MCCAIN WAS FOR OPTING AND THEN AGAINST IT AND NOW HE'S FINANLY FILLED PAPERS. SO TO CALL OBAMA IS HYPOCRIT IS JUST A LIE. MCCAIN HAS BEEN DOING WHAT HE HAS BECOME KNOWN FOR FLIP FLOPPING ON THIS ISSUES JUST LIKE THE OTHERS. MCCAIN HAS NO GROUND TO CALL SOMEONE A HYPOCRIT WHEN HE FLIP FLOPPED ON TAXES, IMMIGRATION, DRILLING, RESTORING THE EVERGLADES,THE WAR IN IRAQ, AND RENEWABLE ENERGY, AND I'LL TELL YOU SOMETHING ELSE MCCAIN IS GOING TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT ON COLONIZING IRAQ FOR ITS OIL. MCCAIN IS A LIAR AND A CHEAT AND AS LONG AS HE'S DICTATED BY THE RIGHT WING LUNATICS WHO DOESN'T SHARE ANY VALUES OR IDEOLOGIES FOR THOSE OF US IN THE MIDDLE,WE WILL BLOCK HIS PRESIDENCY. WE NEED A NEW LEADERSHIP FOR THIS IS A NEW ERA IN AMERICAN HISTORY AND THAT LEADER IS BARACK OBAMA. WE ALREADY HAD RIGHT WING RUNNING THE COUNTRY AND LOOK WHERE IT GOT US. SHARE YOURSELVES AND VOTE OBAMA.

Posted by: SARAH | June 20, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

In terms of spending and winning outcome, Obama is the same as Mitt Romney.

Posted by: Charlie Brown | June 20, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Obama is exploiting people's discontent and has hijacked the Democratic Party. My friends and I question his authenticity and the sincerity of his promises. Somehow, we can't help but feel that under his leadership the country will spiral into disaster. We're beginning to feel that Obama is not the best choice now.

Posted by: Thursday | June 20, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Andy is an idiot. Never seen such a total lack of logic on WaPo post in the five months I've been reading them.

Posted by: Headline | June 20, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

McCain Raises Money The Hard Way -

He Marries It

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Didn't McCain get into a little mess of his own with the FEC? Borrowing money, using matching funds as collateral, going millions over the limit, trying to back out...

www.StopThinkVote.com/facts/politicalfacts.html

Posted by: DMW | June 19, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

For everyone asking "what do they expect in return for their largesse" and other forms of the same tired question, I think you should probably be more concerned about Barack Obama. He is raising more money from more people and is having to do less to get it done. What does this mean? He owes more favors.

More generally, if a person can't take a donor's money, smile and say "thank you very much," and then ignore their phone calls when they're in office, that person shouldn't be in professional politics.

Posted by: Andy | June 19, 2008 8:46 PM
----------------------------------------

Good try Andy - - that theory can't hold water. We the people that send in our $5.00 are simply trying to help the man get there. We definitely will not be asking him for anything other than what he already knows to do. We trust him to do the job, that is why we are sending him to the White House. Do you get it? It really is not as complicated as you are trying to make it out to be. Something tells me it's to simple for you to comprehend.

Posted by: Dee | June 19, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

So the gist of this is McCain's donars are rich and the only way to get their money is to press the flesh. Ha Ha Ha. That's because before they write the check they want to express what they want in return. Obama's donars just give the money in small amounts no demands made.

Posted by: Headline | June 19, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Obama's contributors are in the MILLIONS and they give about $5 each.

While I'm sure the Republicans will whine about influence peddling, I doubt $5 will buy policy.

Posted by: Aldous | June 19, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

For everyone asking "what do they expect in return for their largesse" and other forms of the same tired question, I think you should probably be more concerned about Barack Obama. He is raising more money from more people and is having to do less to get it done. What does this mean? He owes more favors.

More generally, if a person can't take a donor's money, smile and say "thank you very much," and then ignore their phone calls when they're in office, that person shouldn't be in professional politics.

Posted by: Andy | June 19, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Shear:

You wrote: "McCain's fundraising has improved dramatically since he secured the nomination in early March. But unlike Obama, he's had to do it the very hard way, slogging through fundraiser after fundraiser, shaking hand after hand.
...
Total take: more than $4 million."

You're joking, right? $4 million in four visits? $1 million per home is "slogging"?

The real questions are:

* what are those donors expecting to get in return?
* wouldn't the candidate be more independent if he were raising small donations from millions of people instead of big donations from a few?

Posted by: JohnD | June 19, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Anybody know how much of those campaign contributions Obama took in during the primaries that he gave to towns and cities of superdelegates?

Change? His advisors all look like the Bill Clinton administration!

Now, after the primaries, he is saying NAFTA is great while during the primaries he called it a mistake! Which is it?

Posted by: NYSmike | June 19, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what Mr Belo and his ilk expect in return for their largesse?

Posted by: | June 19, 2008 12:00 PM

--------------------------------

The same thing all those high rollers expect from Saint O. Access, if you think Saint is making his dough off small donors then lets have him just accept money in the 20-50-100 donations and do without the executives and the money they are bundling for him. Deal? Naw Saint O would break that one real soon.

Posted by: Kabookey | June 19, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

JULIAN YOU ARE WRONG!

McCain never tried to opt out of public financing for the general election. No canidate since Nixon has opted out of public financing for the general election.

McCain opted out of the public financing system for the PRIMARIES as did Obama, Hillary, Romney etc... the DNC saw this as an opportunity to throw some mud on McCain because since the dems are holding up campaign committee nominations, there can be no majority decision on ANYTHING brought to their attention.

So the bottom line is, no McCain NEVER tried to opt out of the public financing system for the general election and Obama will be the first since Nixon. Great company he's keeping.

He says he wants change? Yeah change back to the 70s... his policies mirror Carters failed policies and he wasn't the big money influence Nixon enjoyed. What a great change agent.

Posted by: Ryan | June 19, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

And by the hard way you mean catering his energy policy to big oil, so he can get campaign money.

Posted by: Julian | June 19, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Micheal D. Shear, I'm challenging your article because its misleading. On the Public funding questionaire Obama check it off but in small print at the bottom of the questionaire, Obama reserved the right to chose. Mccain also tried to Opt out of Public financing and the DNC has filed a law suit against Mccain. If Obama didn't reserve the right to chose then why isn't the RNC filling suit against Obama? Did Obama reserve the right to chose? therefore, Obama didn't promise Mccain anything because he was leaving his options open.
Mccain's charges are inaccurate and misleading to distort Obama's image because he didn't read the small print. T I would appreciate if you would take up my challenge and correct me if I'm wrong but I seriously doubt it. Thank YOu.

Posted by: Carol | June 19, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

How about he didn't really attend the church for about 12 years. He has lived in Washington and when he was a state senator pretty much was never even in the same town as the church. He was a member of that church about as much as I am a member of the church I used to attend in Tallahassee when I lived there 8 years ago even though I still get their news letters. I have to be honest, if that is about all you have on the guy I think I have a pretty good candidate. Let me know when you find the off shore accounts with the millions he embezzled or the back room payoff he was involved in. Till then he may be about the cleanest guy in Washington. If there was anything to get on him Hillary's henchmen would have found it, God knows she tried.

===========
McCain just go a Powerful Money Raiser.

To all you Obama Pawns, Do the Math...

(20 Years x 52 Sundays = 1,040 Reverend Wright Sermons)

God Bless America!

PS

Why have we NOT been attacked by Terrorist since 9/11?

Weird!!!

Posted by: It's Time... | June 19, 2008 2:00 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"It's Time... " would like to call us "Obama pawns"--well,how about you stop your fear mongering just because you don't like the fact that Obama will win in November.

He's go more support than McCain and is a better candidate. Get a life.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain will make the same mistake as Hillary. Get all the power brokers in the Party to support you. Get all the corporate players and Pacs behind you, get the Washington Press to anoint you and print your press releases and talking points....and then get totally out-maneuvered by an incredibly run grass-roots organization run through the web and organized in every 50 states. Come on Inauguration Day!!

Posted by: thebob.bob | June 19, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse


McCain just go a Powerful Money Raiser.

To all you Obama Pawns, Do the Math...

(20 Years x 52 Sundays = 1,040 Reverend Wright Sermons)

God Bless America!

PS

Why have we NOT been attacked by Terrorist since 9/11?

Weird!!!

Posted by: It's Time... | June 19, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Could it be that maybe people want to give money to Obama and not to Mccain?
Could it be Mccain's people don't have a clue how to raise money on the net and how to put together an on line campaign?
Could it be after 8 months of watching what Obama was doing they were too stupid to learn anything, they just don't get it? Could it be this is it with Mccain, what you see is what you get, the guy can't learn or adapt to todays technology and change? Could it just be his age and he is so stuck in his old ways he is just too lazy to even try to learn?
COULD IT BE THAT IS WHAT WE CAN EXPECT IF HE WAS EVER TO GET ELECTED?
Could it be he is a guy living in the 1960's who admits he can't even operate a computer?
Could it be an indication of his intellect?
Could it be he just doesn't care and knows he is just a throw away candidate in an election he can't win anyway?
COULD IT BE ALL OF THE ABOVE?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Yahoo!My Yahoo!Mail Make Y! your home pageYahoo! SearchSearch:Welcome, jj1234575
[Sign Out, My Account]Answers Home -Forum -Blog -Help
Ask Answer Discover Search for questions: Advanced My Profile
Home > Politics & Government > Elections > Open Question stef Member since:
August 22, 2007
Total points:
4143 (Level 4)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

Open QuestionShow me another »
Oboma or McCain?
21 minutes ago - 3 days left to answer.
Report It

0 stars - mark this as Interesting! Who found this interesting?
Be the first person to mark this question as interesting!
Email
Save
Add to private Watchlist
Save to My Web

Add to My Yahoo!

Add to Del.icio.us

RSS
Answers (9) Show: All Answers Oldest to Newest Newest to Oldest Rated Highest to Lowest
by Chloe Member since:
April 06, 2008
Total points:
199 (Level 1)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

Obama
17 minutes ago
1 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by smidge Member since:
February 18, 2006
Total points:
5968 (Level 5)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

i can't believe i am going to say this....but i still don't know. one of these guys needs to convince me they are ready for the whole job, not one issue here, or one there. what a mess it should be...
17 minutes ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by Ala Member since:
February 24, 2008
Total points:
782 (Level 2)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

Obama
12 minutes ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by candlein... Member since:
July 23, 2006
Total points:
18739 (Level 6)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

McCain
12 minutes ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by Brit S Member since:
June 16, 2008
Total points:
131 (Level 1)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

Obama!!!!! McCain is a republican loser that wants to stay in Iraq for a hundred years! NO Obama alll the way...
11 minutes ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by TOO SHORT Member since:
July 31, 2006
Total points:
8678 (Level 5)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

OBAMA/ LETS NOT PUT BUSH BACK IN THE WHITE HOUSE
8 minutes ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by obama smear the fear monger Member since:
May 23, 2008
Total points:
802 (Level 2)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

NAME-BRAND journalists have let Barack Obama make any claim he chooses about Iraq, Afghanistan or coping with terrorism without pinning him down for details.

Yet many of his comments and positions seem stunningly naive about national security. Given that this man may become our next president, shouldn't he explain how he'd do the many impressive things he's promised?

This week, Obama claimed, again, that he'd promptly capture Osama bin Laden. OK, tell me how: Specifically, which concrete measures would he take that haven't been taken? How would he force our intelligence agencies to locate bin Laden? And he can't just respond, "That's classified."

He also claimed that fighting terrorism is a law-enforcement problem, not a military one (should we send the NYPD to Mosul and Kandahar?), and that the answer to terrorism is the approach taken after the 1993 World Trade Center attack, featuring conventional trials and prison terms.

That flaccid post-'93 response only encouraged terrorists - who are unfazed by the prospect of a US prison, where the quality of life's better than it was at home. The Clinton administration's hesitancy and softness gave us the subsequent attacks on the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia, on our embassies in East Africa, on the USS Cole and, ultimately, the events of 9/11.

The senator needs to tell us why it would be different now.

Obama has also said he'd send our troops into Pakistan, although he'll withdraw rapidly from Iraq. His unwillingness to discuss the consequences of a hasty retreat from Baghdad is one thing - but invading Pakistan would be an order of magnitude worse.

A substantial number of Iraq's 26 million citizens did welcome us. In Pakistan, with its 170 million Muslims and some of the most rugged terrain on earth, anti-Americanism prevails. Any US military incursion would be greeted with outrage and demands for a military response.

Nor does Obama appear to grasp that armies need fuel, ammunition, food, spare parts and other supplies. Nearly everything for our troops in landlocked Afghanistan, from bottled water to medical supplies, now comes via Pakistani ports, roads and railroads. If those long, difficult routes were cut, how would President Obama supply our troops? And no, it can't all be done by air.

Oh, Pakistan has nukes, too.

Also this week, Obama's advisers stated that, if apprehended, Osama bin Laden should be tried in a conventional US courtroom. My fellow Americans, do you believe that?

Do you believe that this arch-terrorist, publicly proud of his responsibility for 9/11, should be given all the rights of a US citizen and a public platform to engage in propaganda?

What the full-rights-for-terrorists advocates fail to comprehend is that our judicial processes - so dear to us - are viewed by terrorists as a means to advance their cause, to embarrass us, to reveal our intelligence methods and to perpetuate their martyr myth.

Harsh as it may sound, a dead terrorist is dead, but an imprisoned terrorist is a cause (and not just for his fellow radicals). Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is forgotten, but our Guantanamo prisoners are pop stars.

Obama appears out of his depth on all this, but the gushingly friendly media have given him a pass on every groundless claim or gaffe. It's time for journalists to start asking him tough questions - to press him when he doesn't give serious answers. Isn't that their job?

Those who knew Obama in his university days claim that he couldn't be persuaded to study history. It shows. And his lifelong lack of interest in the military is self-evident.

The response that "he has knowledgeable advisers" isn't enough. Obama's military and counterterror "experts" compose a unique collection of the dismissed, the discredited and the dysfunctional. Most appear to be out to settle personal grudges rather than to advance our nation's security.

Let's hope that just one high-profile journalist pushes Obama on the following questions:

* How would you find Osama bin Laden? What, specifically, would you do differently?

* What would be the rules for capturing or killing Osama?

* How would you manage the consequences of the military incursion into Pakistan you've threatened? Are you willing to go to war with Pakistan?

* What would be the specific results of a swift troop withdrawal from Iraq?

* Why would a judicial approach to defeating terrorists work this time when it failed to protect us in the past?

* Do you truly believe that self-admitted terrorists, when captured, deserve the full legal privileges of US citizens?

If this highly talented candidate has glaring gaps in his understanding of the world, voters deserve to know. If his campaign promises have no substance, we deserve to know that, too.
6 minutes ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by Ch H Member since:
June 18, 2008
Total points:
165 (Level 1)
Add to My Contacts

Block User

bob barr
libertarian
59 seconds ago
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

by John J_democracy_equitywise Member since:
June 16, 2008
Total points:
8 (Level 1) none is good. mccain has been influence peddler in arizona and obam , black influence peddler in illinois democratic party , both if investigated by f b i may wind up in jail gop and democratic parties should draft suitable honest politician to lead usa. rudy giuliani of new york is 10 times better than mccain, there are many democrats more honest than obama. obama is like black cloud with cyclone but it has no prospect of rain repeat rain. obama an inexperienced politician with ties to convicted felon is no good apparently for large leadership inm usa. we are sorry that white majority was in error to trust black surge in usa. But whites may not be allowed to destroy u s prosperity in unwise decision of a wrong leader. obama is no good to maintain black's future in usa. caution caution danger ahead;
1 second ago - Edit - Delete
Source(s):
the rev dr kamal karna roy , a tactical mr clean as gop hopeful for u s presidential electoral competition among members of weaker communities in usa.2008.
0 Rating: Good Answer 0 Rating: Bad Answer Report It Sorry, you must be Level 2 to rate

Thanks for your answer. You've earned 2 points!Get 2 points for Answering a question and 10 points for a best answer. Tell me more

You're on a roll, keep answering.More questions like this one:


Ever notice this about Obama lovers?
0 Stars In /dir/index?sid=&link=list - Asked by Richard M - 8 answers - 4 minutes ago
Are white people just angry that Barack Obama 'chose' his 'Black side' (2 questions)?
0 Stars In /dir/index?sid=&link=list - Asked by rmcneary05 - 8 answers - 5 minutes ago
are they love sadam or sharoon ?
0 Stars In /dir/index?sid=&link=list - Asked by Mouaz A - 5 answers - 6 minutes ago
What is the diffirence between a terrorist first jab and a freedom bump?
0 Stars In /dir/index?sid=&link=list - Asked by fox_news_twisted_reality_tv - 9 answers - 8 minutes ago Open Questions in Elections
Ever notice this about Obama lovers?
Are white people just angry that Barack Obama 'chose' his 'Black side' (2 questions)?
are they love sadam or sharoon ?
What is the diffirence between a terrorist first jab and a freedom bump?
Resolved Questions in Elections
Do you Love Michelle more than Obama,the Hopeful Candidate ?
Why does Michelle Obama think promoting the 'fist bump' makes her First Lady material?
Why did Obama stop two Muslim women from appearing in a photo shoot with him?
After Obama loses will he be able to collect Unemployment in Prison?

Hello John J_democrac...

Total Points 8
Level 1 Thanks!

You answered a question

(2 points)
ADVERTISEMENT

Categories
All Categories

Politics & Government

Civic Participation

Elections

Embassies & Consulates

Government

Immigration

International Organizations

Law & Ethics

Law Enforcement & Police

Military

Politics

Other - Politics & Government

Sponsor Results
Answering Service
Custom & Live Answering Services.Compare Services & Quotes...
www.AnsweringServiceGuide.net

Answer Racing Products
Come see the complete line of Answer riding apparel.
www.gmo1.com

Diabetes Answers
4000+ Pages of Diabetes Information Get Empowered and Learn...
www.dLife.com

See your message here...

Answers International:
Argentina Australia Brazil Canada China France Germany Hong Kong India Indonesia Italy Japan Malaysia Mexico New Zealand Philippines Quebec Singapore South Korea Spain Taiwan Thailand United Kingdom United States Vietnam en Español Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. Click here for the Full Disclaimer.

Help us improve Yahoo! Answers. Tell us what you think.

Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright/IP Policy - Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Community Guidelines - Safety Tips

Posted by: rev dr kamal karna roy a gop politician in making | June 19, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Well, eventually the rich donors will dry up...dumb move McCain, look what the old politics got you.

The number of Obama contributors keeps growing - and it's regular folks like me!!

Obamas approach on campaign financing is much more respectable than McCains. No wonder McCain wants to open up drilling offshore - I guess the $800,000 in donations he's received from oil industry bought something.

Whine all you want old man, you're a horrible candidate with a bad plan - and American has noticed. Pretty soon he'll be trailing Obama around, hanging out front of the venue with a sign and a tin cup.

Posted by: JDB | June 19, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what Mr Belo and his ilk expect in return for their largesse?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

"not the way he wants to spend the final two months after the conventions"

I'm not sure how you could possibly KNOW how "he wants to spend" his time.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 19, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company