Media Pundits on Obama and Public Financing -- Shut the F**k Up

Stop using the word "flip-flopper" as if no one is ever allowed to change their minds. Discuss the meaning of the changed mind, fair enough -- but stop with this infantile phrase.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

I can understand the media running with the story of Obama choosing not to opt into public funding for a day or so of programming. And it's true, early in his run he said he was in favor of using public funding, before his candidacy took off and he discovered how much money he could make on the internet from millions of small donors. And is that a flip-flop or a mind change, and is that just the most unacceptable thing in the world? Apparently it was when John Kerry was branded with the flip-flop word endlessly.

Flip-flop. Give up on this word, okay? The opposite of a flip-flopper is someone who sticks to their same opinion no matter what -- such as George Bush and the stupid Iraq war. And John McCain and the stupid Iraq war.

Never ever changing your mind is NOT a good thing. As Stephen Colbert said about George Bush in his famous appearance at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner: "The greatest thing about this man is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday, that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday."

Stop using the word "flip-flopper" as if no one is ever allowed to change their minds. Discuss the meaning of the changed mind, fair enough -- but stop with this infantile phrase.

Plus Arianna Huffington has a very good post Monday on the media's ignoring McCain's own changing his mind about using public funding -- not to mention his taking out loans using the public funding as COLLATERAL, and the illegality of this not being investigated because of obstructionism at the FEC.

But wouldn't Obama be a perfect chump if he looked at the present set-up, and his enormous fundraising abilities -- and he went, you know, I'm going to be a Good Little Boy, I'm going to meekly stick with what I said at first, and just take the small money (in comparison) that the government gives me? And then said, I'm sure the Swiftboaters and their ilk won't come out and try to slime me. And even if I lose from doing this, still -- I'll get a gold star for good behavior and for never ever flip-flopping. And you can all suffer through McCain for four years, and also the Supreme Court will be ruined for the next 75 years. Enjoy! But I didn't flip-flop.

Give me a break. Give all of us a break, and stop boring us with the endless coverage of this story.

Do you recall the enormous fundraising advantage the Republicans had in 2000 and 2004?

I don't recall too many in the media decrying the lack of fundraising equality between the two parties, or the way the Republican Party was in bed with the Corporate World (who helped us all ignore global warming for 8 years, not to mention ignore seeking energy independence). No one said boo about that. Indeed the media seemed to ADMIRE the Republicans ability to raise and raise and raise money. They like power when it comes from the people in power. When it comes from people knocking on the door, seemingly they don't like it.

I agree with the few commentators who point out that the reaction of most Obama supporters and would-be supporters is that we're all relieved to see he's in the real world enough to take advantage of his fund raising superiority. If he chose to stick to his original thought, he would greatly lessen his chances of winning. And I agree with him, the public funding system IS flawed. Until it's fixed, if you have access to lots of money, it's foolhardy not to take that advantage.

And why is he able to raise this money? Because lots of people want him elected. And the point that most of his donors give less than $100 is truly significant. His financial advantage is from the general public, and not from the Corporate Juggernaut that the Republicans used to be raking in the dough from.

And if commentators like Monica Crowley and that black Republican guy with the slightly crossed eyes who keeps getting trotted out on TV are just besides themselves about it -- well, let them choke on their own vomit. I'm sorry, is that hostile? Let me put it another way. Let them choke on their own vomit. Sorry that's the same way.

But I'm really bored with this story, and I am watching the "Pundits Ahoy" shows a lot less. Maybe other people are too. Move on from this one, it's a stupid discussion.

Go To Homepage

Popular in the Community