digg

Join DiggAbout

An Important Campaign Announcement from Barack Obama watch!

youtube.com — Barack Obama talks about the decision to opt-out of the broken public financing system.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • livegreenordie, on 06/19/2008, -26/+55 Good release~
    • DooM, on 06/19/2008, -7/+60Um.. that's what she said?
    • Stephen03, on 06/19/2008, -33/+5Too bad he's not going to become president.
      • RDinSB, on 06/19/2008, -4/+13It would be too bad if he didn't become president. I don't know what you know that makes you so sure he won't win... I think he will win in a landslide. Mark my words.
        • Laughsatyou, on 06/20/2008, -10/+3wont you be disappointed.
        • tidu, on 06/20/2008, -1/+5what, you guys have it rigged or something, Laughsatyou?
        • Stephen03, on 06/20/2008, -4/+2Landslide? Alright, bookmark this page and come to it after the general election. I'll be here.
      • Fafnir43, on 06/19/2008, -0/+14[citation needed]
      • 36CrzyFsts, on 06/21/2008, -0/+0Stephen do you not get the newspaper or are you just some moronic bigot? I'm telling you he is our new president.
    • StaleCookie, on 06/19/2008, -12/+5Napkin please!
    • gn0stik, on 06/19/2008, -5/+57Did it bother anyone else that his eyes were obviously not looking into the camera?

      The camera was too close, and you could really tell he was reading the teleprompter.. I felt like he was looking over my shoulder while talking to me...

      Most probably wouldn't notice, but since I'm paranoid about ninjas, I kept looking behind me to see if they (the ninjas) were creeping up to cut my throat silently before vanishing into thin air.

      Good message though, I hope he feels the same way about SIGS and PACs in law making, not just elections.
      • RDinSB, on 06/19/2008, -2/+12I felt the same way!
      • bradbeattie, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3Same. So I stopped watching and only listened. Much easier to focus when someone's reading from a cards or a teleprompter.
        • artofwar420, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1I did exactly the same thing. Good message.
      • Memitim, on 06/20/2008, -0/+11I'd imagine that he was pretty paranoid about the ninjas over your shoulder, too, since he had to keep his eyes on them the entire time.
        • sephiroth965, on 06/20/2008, -4/+2Thank you Memitim; That waaas the joke.
      • sfacets, on 06/20/2008, -1/+4Nah, better than that glassy far-away stare Bush has when he's looking into the camera and declaring war on "Islamofascists".
      • boejangles, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3If by ninjas... you meant Hillary peering from behind a door frame, licking the edge of a Rambo knife whispering "you better pick me muther ucka"... then yes.
    • p0s3r, on 06/19/2008, -19/+7He looks like a dumb robot reading the teleprompter. He doesn't even look like he's understanding the words that he's reading. Never in the entire 2:44 minutes did he take his eyes off his mind master in the teleprompter.
      • haydesigner, on 06/20/2008, -3/+6What does that have to do with ANYTHING?
        • fas2, on 06/20/2008, -2/+2Is it too much to ask that a president can hold a short speech without a damn teleprompter? ***** it.
      • cphoover, on 06/20/2008, -0/+7O and mccain is such a great speaker? he fumbles his words almost as much as dubya, and that is saying something.
    • else7en, on 06/19/2008, -14/+3obama/paul 08 ftw
    • IglooBurner, on 06/20/2008, -2/+10Not only can he talk the talk, he can walk the walk. Very rare in politics.
    • leahcim, on 06/20/2008, -8/+3I like Obama, but 90% of the people on this board are fooling themselves or just outright lying about their thoughts on the man's motivation to do this. It's quite clear, he's like any other politician really. In the beginning when he had only a small chance of even winning the nomination and no fundraising going on he wanted a Publically Financed General Election. His mind started to change when he had millions and millions rolling in and it was clear McCain or whoever the Republicans nominated was in no way going to come close to his number.
      He's now backing out of it so he can use all his money, its as simple as that. Politics. Although I cannot blame him for doing it, you must realize he reneged on his promise because this benefited him more.

      The blind willful ignorance on this subject from diggers is pretty sickening really, and you're no better than the people you try to demonize who do the same things on the other side.
      • boejangles, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2Wrong.
        Obama , he checked yes to a question that said ... " if your opponent agrees to deny public funding, will you do the same..."
        At the time there was no opponent, and it wasn't until yesterday when McCain said he would accept public funding.

        PLUS +
        After Obama checked yes he added 280 words explaining exactly what he would do in the future, which is what he is doing now.

        What was that about blind willful ignorance you say?
      • roodammy44, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2When you compare it against bush's genocide against the middle east, and a possible hundred year occupation in iraq....
        Just the sheer list of things that have happened in the US govt in the last few years...

        If all the right wing hate machine can complain about is a stupid flag pin or a slight change of decision in an insignificant issue, or just plain lies (that he's a muslim/terrorist) then you know obama must be pretty damn honest.
  • alapoet, on 06/19/2008, -30/+122And good decision, on Obama's part. Bravo!
    • Rusticles, on 06/19/2008, -4/+27It seems too good to be true that he might be our next president...
      • specialK16, on 06/20/2008, -1/+14Exactly like what I was thinking. I truly hope for you guys this works out.
      • dexter411, on 06/20/2008, -12/+2Stupid ***** sheep...
        • kjm16, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3Stupid ***** cow... MoooCain
        • skyroket, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2@kjm16 Hey man that hits me where it hurts. I play a Tauren, so I take offense at being lumped in with bigots like McCain.
    • had3l, on 06/19/2008, -2/+17Honestly, while I somewhat understand what he is doing and his reasons to do so, I wonder: Would he be making this announcement if he couldn't raise more money than he would've with public financing? What if it was Hillary or McCain making the same announcement after proposing a publicly financed campaign? I'll give Obama some credit because I (want to) believe in the guy, but still, it does raise some questions.

      That said, it is nothing that would make me back a man who supports torture and invasion of privacy instead.
      • phybere, on 06/20/2008, -0/+9Of course he wouldn't be, originally he said he would accept public financing (before he had the money he does now).

        I can't really blame him for it though, it's what any rational person would do. Besides, he's not using our tax money this way.
      • Yang1205, on 06/20/2008, -4/+4You're one of those people that try to find the negative in everything....
      • tidu, on 06/20/2008, -0/+4Well, he could always use extra money. Anyone would take that 80 million and make use of it, the possibilities are endless. And you know, he could have made this announcement in October when he was sure he wouldn't run out of money. He has no idea how the trend of donations will go.
      • sinurgy, on 06/20/2008, -2/+4It's a smart decision but that doesn't make it right. While I'm certainly not jumping off the wagon over it, I have to say I'm disappointed he;s flip-flopping now that it's in his best interest.
        Many of you should feel ashamed of yourselves for being so blindly devoted. We need to let Obama know that it's not ok to start acting like...well...like a politician. If this was any other candidate, digg would be raising holly hell. Please put down the pom poms and try to be objective!
      • fool13, on 06/20/2008, -3/+1Good to see at least some Obama supporters are blinding supporting him. This is a flip-flop, he has supported public financing and said he would continue to do so in the general election. Now that it is financially convenient he is changing his promise. Change indeed, I just hope people will begin to wake up and see through this guy.

        If you want to support him based on his policies that is fine. But the message is not consistent with the messenger.
    • theaceoffire, on 06/20/2008, -3/+10I gave my $15... if I had more I would offer it.
    • jabberwolf, on 06/20/2008, -12/+1Basically means lets play on a fair playing field... except when I have the advantage.
      FLIP FLIP FLIP !!!!
      and
      Hypocritical!

      He basically wants everyone to play fair, except when something is an advantage for him.
      Basically that's the way his campaign has always been run, I guess there really isnt anything surprising about this.


      • calbach, on 06/20/2008, -0/+8The right wing abuse of this system doesn't exactly make it a "fair playing field"...

        That was pretty much the reason for his decision.
        • bradysdaman, on 06/20/2008, -5/+1what abuse is that exactly? evidence?
        • roodammy44, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Evidence? Fox news?
          The evidence is practically everywhere.
          For example, any station that reported he went to a muslim school
        • bradysdaman, on 06/24/2008, -0/+1are you serious roodammy, he attended a madrasa, its in his own book. and the media has a liberal bias not a conservative one.
      • gwolf, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1Another way to look at it is he's not going to ask for money he doesn't need.
        He could have been greedy and just taken the extra cash to have it around.

        I like that kind of thinking.
        • bradysdaman, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1you're an idiot...he's never going to stop asking for donations. He'll take in tons of cash that he won't use that will go into public funding to be used for McCain and future candidates.
    • PolishLogic, on 06/20/2008, -10/+2Oddly enough, if this was coming from McCain, this would be called a flip flop. At least there's no hypocrisy among diggers.


      /facepalm
      • SpinningHead, on 06/20/2008, -1/+6It was republicans who started that ridiculous flip-flop term. He gets called on changing his position, because the republicans decided it was a bad thing. Kinda like when republicans said they could never vote for someone who cheated on their wife (until McCain) or that someone who married ketchup money was a gold digger (until McCain....see beer heiress).
        • PolishLogic, on 06/20/2008, -4/+1So you can't change your position if you're a Republican, but you can if you're a Democrat.

          As I said, at least there's not hypocrisy there.
        • SpinningHead, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Read it again. Republicans said you cant change your position which is why its pointed out when McCain does it.
        • PolishLogic, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1"Republicans said you cant change your position which is why its pointed out when McCain does it."

          Strange, because I'm a registered Republican, and I've never had a problem with a person changing their position unless it was merely out of a pandering convenience. Although, I may have a problem the position itself, but changing your opinion on things is no big deal.

          So again, other than an excuse I'd expect from a 9 year-old, why is it wrong to treat the two equally?
        • SpinningHead, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1You must have missed the whole flip flop fervor when Kerry changed his position on a bill after the contents of that bill changed. If Obama said we cant elect McCain because his security detail rides in SUV s and then you see footage of Obama's security detail showing up in SUVs, you would've point out the hypocrisy? Its like hitting someone for no reason and then whining about it when they hit you back.
    • jcaprario, on 06/20/2008, -4/+4I guess the system wasn't broken when he announced his intention to use public financing in the general election.
      Does anyone know what happened to the system since then?
  • bababoosh, on 06/19/2008, -28/+213All of the opinion saturated radio programs, where sadly most people get their news and information about not just B.O but all things political, are complaining that he backed out of his signed agreement to take public funds. Well I say so what. If the worst thing about him is that he decided to change his mind and not use tax payer money to fund his campaign, that's alright with me.
    It's funny to me how they make such a big deal about this and totally ignore John McCain's obvious, pandering, flip-flops. In my opinion, Obama has been the most honest and candid politician we've seen in a long time, and thank God. He's exactly the kind of person we've been hoping and praying will run for President and I am so excited.
    • granolajoe, on 06/19/2008, -3/+20"All of the opinion saturated radio programs, where sadly most people get their news and information about not just B.O but all things political, are complaining that he backed out of his signed agreement to take public funds. Well I say so what."

      Barack Obama has to be cautious about these types of actions. Remember just how much flak she took, and how hypocritical Hilary looked when she switched opinions for political gain or justification of her actions.
      • bababoosh, on 06/19/2008, -2/+9point taken. But Hillary was also notorious for doing such things. I'd like to hope Obama has enough integrity for me to give him the benefit of the doubt and allow for some mind changing. At least now I and the rest of the country get to decide whether or not to fund his campaign.
        • Muyoso, on 06/19/2008, -9/+3But of course, you neither know him at all, NOR do you have any evidence for integrity. In fact, you have DOZENS of examples where his integrity was obviously lacking. LIke when he forced out all competition in Chicago so that the voters only had one choice, him. Like when he stayed with a racist church for 20 years, using it for political gain, then when it was politically convenient, he dropped the church. Like when he said he would meet with leaders of countries of Iran and North Korea, but he wouldnt meet with our military commander in Iraq. Examples like this show lack of integrity.

          That, AND, the fact that if McCain would have done this, you guys would be going ape *****.
        • Fafnir43, on 06/20/2008, -1/+7a) Your recall of the Wright fiasco seems to be somewhat lacking. Initially, he defended Wright (where disowning him would have been the standard political maneuver). Then Wright, who had presumably been asked to keep a low profile by this point, threw him under the bus by giving a highly inflammatory interview. (Obama himself said that until he watched the tape, he thought it would be something relatively minor and was prepared to defend the guy again.) Then Obama (rightly) threw Wright and his church under the bus in turn. I see nothing wrong here.

          b) Not sure what the hell you're talking about with Chicago - he had a Republican opponent and won in a landslide (70% of the vote). Admittedly the original Republican nominee stepped down after the Chicago Tribune successfully sued to have various embarrassing child custody documents released, but I really don't see any connection to Obama there.

          c) Again, not sure what you're talking about here - he has an Iraq trip planned some time in the near future, and considering McCain's frequent trips it would be silly for him not to go.

          d) If McCain had done this, my reaction would have been "meh". McCain has really made so many embarrassing flip-flops and had so many senior moments that changing his campaign finance scheme in a fairly inoffensive manner wouldn't even be a blip on the radar. Maybe if he'd refused public funding then taken it back the next day, but even that wouldn't be his best blooper...

          So, yeah. This doesn't really affect my view of Obama at all.
        • bababoosh, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3Fafnir I couldn't have said it better myself...

          but you did forget
          e) The Bush Admin's current and past plans to meet with Iran after repeatedly bashing Obama at home and abroad for doing the same thing.

          as far as I am concerned, there hasn't been enough diplomacy on the part of the current administration or any of their lackeys (old and new) to discount it's efficacy.

          Muyoso, please if it makes you feel any better we'll give you some time go and get the transcript from whatever Fox News or Limbaugh/Hannity program you want to regurgitate, before you come back to respond. Keep in mind, however, that we are all far too smart not to see right through it.
      • tidu, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1You can't change the rules without breaking them.
    • cheifchuck0, on 06/19/2008, -26/+12Praying is for dummies.
      • bababoosh, on 06/19/2008, -2/+9I'm glad I could help you feel better about yourself
      • Qtip42, on 06/19/2008, -12/+2I dug you up cheif..
      • tyywebb, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Now incantations...
      • fool13, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1How is this honest? He said he has always pursued public financing but now that it is financially convenient reneges on his promise. If he said from the start I don't want any part of public financing no one would care but he said he has always supported it and would continue to.
    • EatingPie, on 06/19/2008, -24/+16"If the worst thing about him is that he decided to change his mind and not use tax payer money to fund his campaign, that's alright with me.
      It's funny to me how they make such a big deal about this and totally ignore John McCain's obvious, pandering, flip-flops."

      So when Obama changes his mind, it's "changing his mind." When McCain changes his mind it's a "flip-flop"?

      Being for or against a politician is one thing, but applying a double-standard is another, and sadly that's what I've seen on digg.

      -Pie
      • bababoosh, on 06/19/2008, -4/+24Well, it's a bit more complicated than that, so I wouldn't call it a double-standard. I understand that blanket statements are far easier to make than to actually think about.
        For McCain to all of a sudden change his mind after being consistent on an issue for years, even one he defended less than a month ago, is a flip-flop. It's a flip-flop because now that he is the republican candidate he has to impress is new constituency and get your vote.
        Keep in mind, Pie, that McCain was hated by the conservative movement and even accused on several occasions of being a closet Democrat, maybe not by you, but by most. Now that he is the closest thing they have to a Presidential candidate their tone has changed. For the past 8 years he has consistently disagreed with the current administration (save a few issues regarding the war) Now he has become the quintessential Republican candidate because he knows he needs the vote of the conservative movement to win in November. Obama, on the other hand, has been relatively consistent and when he has changed his mind (or flip-flopped if semantics are really that important to you) he's at least given reasons for doing so. Which allows me the right to let it slide, regardless of whether I agree with his changes or not. Motive, is just as or more important a factor to a voter who posses the capacity to think critically. Integrity is as well. I was a big McCain supporter until this election started. He had my vote and he lost it.

        -Boosh
        • pilot3033, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3It is the difference between listening to evidence and making a decision, and simply changing your mind to make you the most presentable candidate.

        • JCoryan, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1But didn't Barack "listen to evidence" before PLEDGING to take the federal campaign funds? He didn't say he felts this way or believed that way and later changed his mind. No, he PLEDGED, in writing, to take the federal campaign fund. Is his word only good until he changes his mind?

          Really, I understand everyone's point about changing positions or changing your mind...but going back on your word is WRONG. Bush Sr. was WRONG when he pledged "No new taxes" and now Barack is WRONG when he pledged to be our reform candidate and use the federal campaign fund.

          Call it what it is...don't be blind supporters on this issue. You can still like him and vote for him, but he is wrong on this issue because he made a promise to us and he has broken that promise.
      • feebie, on 06/19/2008, -1/+19"I like pie. Wait a minute I don't like pie because people are telling me not to like it."
        and
        "I like pie. Actually, I change my mind. I just had some pie and it made me feel sick. I realized it doesn't work well in my digestive system, and I don't like the feeling it gives me, so I don't like it anymore."

        Which one is the flip-flop?
      • dagamer34, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2"When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
        • bababoosh, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2the facts haven't changed enough in the last 3 weeks to justify using that Keynes quote. In fact they changed a lot more over the years that he was against the idea of drilling.
      • DephexTwin, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2You must be really starved for attention if you still continue to sign your posts even though people digg you down and don't take you seriously because of it.
      • MortalynFlux, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2It's one thing to adjust campaign strategy based on changing circumstances and new information; it's quite another to switch back and forth on basic principles of law, morals, and political philosophy based on which GOP member is standing behind you watching what you say.
    • aliengoods, on 06/19/2008, -7/+26I hate to sound like a lawyer, but his pledge was to talk with the Republican nominee if he were the Democratic nominee about public financing. The pledge never said he WOULD take public funds. You may think it's a loophole, but I think it's an important distinction. Promising to talk about something and promising to do something are two very different things.

      Also, John McCain has already backed out of public funds after using the very same funds to secure a loan for his campaign, and the Republicans have more dirty money than ever flowing into the RNC. If Obama did take public funds, I would severely question his judgment.
    • TimmyGUNZ, on 06/19/2008, -10/+5Sorry, I just saw you sign your comment "-Pie" and had to bury it without reading it.
    • sumdog, on 06/20/2008, -0/+5There is an issue here. Obama can easily raise more funds than what was available by taking public financing. By not taking public funds, he can spend millions more than if he had taken them. He now has no limit on how much he can spend on his campaign.
      • gwolf, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3Pretty smart huh?
      • purzzzell, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2I was thinking the same thing -

        It IS to his advantage, and he'll probably raise double that 80m, considering he was able to get 50m in one month in the primary.
        • JCoryan, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1Actually, Barack has already raised over a quarter BILLION dollars. Not bad for the man who's party represents itself as the party of the average American and defender of the poor. So John McCain, being that he is with the RICH party, must be doing even better. Hmmm, nope, he's not even close. Could it be that the rich ACTUALLY support Barack, and not McCain?
    • specialK16, on 06/20/2008, -0/+7I almost threw up when I saw Glenn Beck talking about his special edition of Fusion where he calls out loud Barack Obama a weasel. CNN is so ***** awful. Seriously you should try watching CNN en Español, it's like watching a whole new network.
      • letherial, on 06/20/2008, -0/+4CNN isnt so bad, Glenn beck is...at one time i liked him, not because of his views, but because i like to see both sides before i decide wich one i was on...and i dont know of any conservative view point that isnt buffled into smear, lies and distortion. (fox news) He seemed...somewhat honest, but he got on this whole 'i hate obama cause he is going to blow up America that terrorist swine' bandwagon and i just cant watch him anymore. I dont mind another side, and i dont mind not agreeing with him, but nobody gets to where he is at if they hate America.

        • foontala, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Yes, some "so called" conservatives are sometimes quite blatant in their smears, lies, and distortions. However, I submit that there is a major confusion amongst terminology today: "Republican" does not necessarily imply "conservative," and "Conservative" does not necessarily imply "Republican." I think that the original purposes of the "conservative" movement was to conserve the Constitution. It is obviously not "conservative" the way so-called "Republicans" egregiously ignore the Constitution (e.g. Patriot Act, undeclared wars, warantless spying, etc). If you think the Patriot Act (or the revised one) is constitutional, please do yourself a favor and read the damn thing.

          http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/2cdd02b415ea3a6485 ...

          In short, I beg to differ with one of your statements. There ARE true conservative view points that are not "buffled into smear, lies and distortion."

          Have you ever heard of Ron Paul? Have a look for him on youtube.com or at www.campaignforliberty.org Or check out his book "The Revolution: A Manifesto"
        • letherial, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1i agree, its hard to tell the differnce, so much that im not sure....

          ron paul? maybe if the guy would have a chance to become preisdent...i dont know much about him, and i dont see how he relates to the situation at hand, i may not be happy with it but its going to be mcain or obama....

          even if there was, id still vote for obama, he continues to impress me in so many ways...Still, id like to see some change to the republicans and id like to see them be more for what they are to stand by and not so much about stupidity.

    • DeeBlackthorne, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2I'm still trying to phrase my thoughts about this. Alien Goods made a good statement: Negotiations on the topic broke a while back, and McCain was decidedly mum about it until Obama decided to get a move on.

      I don't think it's a big deal either. Obama's majority of support comes from contributions under $200, and WELL below the maximum individual contribution amount. Yeah, rich people support him too, but no one can prove that he is under pressure to get bought in and start returning favors -- Bush II set the bar really high on that one.

      Phrasing might be the gaffe. But hell, McCain has made a ton more nonsense there too. Keep goin', playa.
  • ericjohnson0, on 06/19/2008, -36/+12Well, it looks like Barack has always been shrewd when it comes to financial matters. As the Republicans (and Mafia) say 'business is business.'

    http://thesaloon.net/blog/_archives/2008/6/18/3751 ...

    • blackcloud333, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2Wow, sounds like you just repeated lines from a movie. Awesome.
  • sleepyjjk, on 06/19/2008, -34/+105This is change.
    • Simonft, on 06/19/2008, -17/+5No, no other candidate for president has ever taken public money, so saying he will not is not change. I agree with the decision though.
      • xexx, on 06/20/2008, -1/+6wtf? No other candidate for president has ever NOT taken public money. That means every other candidate has taken public money, I know I'm being redundant here but apparently it's required...
    • filemeaway, on 06/19/2008, -5/+39...that's not change we can believe in
      *creepy/nervous mccain chuckle*
      • mrfreeziexp, on 06/20/2008, -1/+11It's more like...

        ...that's not --- not change we can belie---believe in.

        *creepy/nervous mccain chuckle* *light applause*
      • Danby123, on 06/20/2008, -1/+4My friends...
    • crowbar77, on 06/19/2008, -9/+6Nice, so you guys finally having something to say when you talk about the "change" he's going to bring.
      • lazerflesh, on 06/19/2008, -2/+16Actually, I'm sick of hearing this from ignorant *****. Yes, *****. Don't take what your pundits say on face value. Obama has some great policies. Check them out on his website.
        • crowbar77, on 06/20/2008, -9/+2It's funny how you people always say go to check out his website, instead of just naming a few policies. I have read some of it btw and all i see is a larger deficit. Take more tax returns for example, he wants to borrow even MORE money to "stimulate" the economy. It's a ridiculous idea, besides the fact it will tank the dollar even more, it will go straight to the Saudi's when the fill up there SUV.
        • Fafnir43, on 06/20/2008, -1/+5Also his books - although I haven't read them myself, apparently they contain quite a lot of detail about his proposed policies and the reasoning behind them.
        • jabberwolf, on 06/20/2008, -7/+1Um do you mean *****? You ***** idiot!

          And whats great about NEW policies when he seems to go with whatever policy that SUITS HIM and the given time?

          He basically wants everyone to play fair, except when something is an advantage to him.
          Basically that's his campaign has always been run, I guess there really isnt anything surprising about this.
        • crowbar77, on 06/20/2008, -4/+4Wow at least tell me why your digging me down. Otherwise your just reinforcing the idea that even his supports can't talk of anything of substance.
        • ozydingo, on 06/20/2008, -0/+5@crowbar77 & others:
          for the record, I am an Obama supporter and dugg your second comment up. We could discuss change, from lobbyist funding to foreign policy & diplomacy (I still can't understand why talking to the leaders of a foreign nation is pandering to the enemy and giving in to terrorists as many McCain supporters would have people believe), but without getting into a fruitless argument which I really just don't feel like doing right now, I just wanted to let you know that for a simple and reasonable request like "let me know why you're digging me down" I dugg you up (just that second comment though :-) )
    • DaDrake, on 06/19/2008, -12/+5Go figure... he is a politician, will do anything to get elected.
      • allengeer, on 06/20/2008, -2/+3im pretty sure he will make smart decisions to get elected. taking public financing is just a dumb decision. the american people don't want their money to finance a campaign. he's doing what the american people want.
      • DaDrake, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Allengeer you do realize that the money comes from tax payers who take the option to give some to a campaign (as a tax right off). So its either you pay the tax, which goes to who knows what, or you make the decision to contribute to a campaign. The Americans who financed this WANTED it to go a campaign.

        And you really think Obama didn't know this 5 months ago when he repeatly pledge to follow McCain high ethical standards?
        • darksideownedu, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2Actually, he agreed to negotiate with McCain on how to use the funds. When it became apparent that McCain had no intention of compromising, Obama decided that he wouldn't use the funds if both the candidates weren't going to be managing the funds in a similar, far way.
        • bradysdaman, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1that is downright wrong darkside...don't spread your stupid liberal lies here
        • sephiroth965, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Yeah, who KNOWS what our taxes go towards, right? ...Idiot.
    • Naieve, on 06/19/2008, -3/+7How dare he not enter a fixed card game.

      HOW DARE HE!!!!

      Rove's probably wondering what to do now.
    • jabberwolf, on 06/20/2008, -10/+4Basically means lets play on a fair playing field... except when I have the advantage.
      FLIP FLIP FLIP !!!!
      and
      Hypocritical!

      Yep change alright, liar in office, gee what's new?!
    • bracketdash, on 06/20/2008, -3/+3Someone should make a crazy ad like they did for the Playstation 3 in Europe. "This is living" can be replaced with "this is change."

      No, in fact, I have time, I'mma go do that right now.
    • DigDugDigger, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3I still want to hear *change* about monetary policy. But, otherwise I'm sold.
    • tpmidd, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2I'm a pretty staunch Conservative, but I'm also a student of political science - and what Obama doing is unprecedented. I can't stand how the media and "talk radio" is ignoring the fact that Obama is truly providing change through his actions: raising well over $250 million, with the possibility of $500m (according to some reports). This is change. I applaud him for not taking public funds for this election. Did he flip flop? Sure he did - but any one with a brain would too after they realized it would be foolish to take money from an election fund used for candidates that can't raise money, when he himself can raise money privately.
    • jbettineski, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1Or the illusion of change.
  • HuskyPuzzle, on 06/19/2008, -32/+20Yep, smart move. GoBama!
  • ccarlson22, on 06/19/2008, -38/+34a great decision from a great leader
    • p0s3r, on 06/19/2008, -15/+7Great decision? He just threw his pledge of taking federal funds under the bus.
      • dagamer34, on 06/20/2008, -2/+7Pledge to talk about it != pledge to take public funds.
    • dexter411, on 06/20/2008, -8/+2Great decision because he knew he'd raise more than his alloted limit. In other words, he's an opportunist and nothing more.
      • atticus8, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1Opportunism: 1. the policy or practice, as in politics, business, or one's personal affairs, of adapting actions, decisions, etc., to expediency or effectiveness regardless of the sacrifice of ethical principles.

        So remind me again what the ethical principle he is violating is? (and once again, he did NOT pledge to take public funds. if you think this, you are misinformed.)
        Or do you think that any rational decision that puts you in a better position is opportunism? Tell me, dexter, when you got your college acceptances, did you pick the best college? That must make you an "opportunist and nothing more" then. When you got job offers, did you take the one that paid the highest for you? I guess that makes you one of those dirty opportunists.

        Your attack is nonsensical.
        • dexter411, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1I only applied to one college, so I wasn't an opportunist at all. Your analogy, like your logic, falls flat.
  • Zanarkand, on 06/19/2008, -32/+120Good stuff. At least he is sticking to his word. I just donated another $50.
    • DiggasWAttitude, on 06/19/2008, -4/+23I've been supporting, caucusing, etc for Barack since day one. I don't follow you though on how this is sticking to his word. Didn't he say from the very beginning that he wanted a publicly funded general campaign? It almost seems slightly backhanded when he said he is 'giving up' the $80 million when this decision allows him to use all the money that his campaign has pulled in from contributions - something like $300 million. This is coming from a very liberal digger and I may be mistaken about his pledge to use public funds for the general.
      • DooM, on 06/19/2008, -4/+23His pledge was that he would negotiate 'aggressively' with the Republican nominee and if that person agreed to only use public funds so would he. John McCain has not agreed to that so Obama has done what he pledged to do. The only weak point is whether he negotiated 'aggressively' about it - Obama's people say he did, McCain's say they wouldn't call it 'aggressive'... so about what you'd expect and who knows what the truth is.
        • leahcim, on 06/20/2008, -3/+1I like Obama, but 90% of the people on this board are fooling themselves or just outright lying about their thoughts on the man's motivation to do this. It's quite clear, he's like any other politician really. In the beginning when he had only a small chance of even winning the nomination and no fundraising going on he wanted a Publically Financed General Election. His mind started to change when he had millions and millions rolling in and it was clear McCain or whoever the Republicans nominated was in no way going to come close to his number.
          He's now backing out of it so he can use all his money, its as simple as that. Politics. Although I cannot blame him for doing it, you must realize he reneged on his promise because this benefited him more.

          The blind willful ignorance on this subject from diggers is pretty sickening really, and you're no better than the people you try to demonize who do the same things on the other side.
        • DooM, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1I'd be right there with you if he had pledged to utilize public funding. HE DIDN'T. He pledged to do it if the Republican nominee did - HE didn't. Surely you can see the difference..? I'm not a blind sycophant - I'm just looking at the facts.
        • whatcha-call-it, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1Who cares if he pledged or not, he already has the money he needs and will get more from people who want to give it to him. So now he is not using money he doesn't need. Seems reasonable and pretty good for the american people because it won't waste 80 million dollars on ads and such.
    • fuzzmeister, on 06/19/2008, -4/+12While this certainly makes sense for the Obama campaign from a financial perspective, I'll say as an Obama supporter that he certainly is not sticking to his word here. He said many times early in the campaign that he wanted to publicly fund his campaign, and only now is he changing that. He is a victim of his own success here, in many ways.
      • Mejari, on 06/19/2008, -7/+4Actually, he only said that he would take public financing if McCain did, and McCain's made it pretty obvious he wont.
      • dagamer34, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2Eh, if it's coming from the people, are they not the public? If we want to enter the spin zone, we can say that McCain is taking money that the government "took" from the people!
    • DaDrake, on 06/19/2008, -15/+5There is no way he is sticking to his word. Worst, there hasn't been any 3rd party right-wing national attacks agaist Obama (there has been for the last 3 weeks against McCain). So essentially, he has back out of his very public agreement with McCain in anticipation of something that hasn't happen. Then again, everyone knows these attacks will happen but Obama certainly knew that when he made the agreement.

      Seems like he will do anything for political gain.... really disapointing.
    • sexyfridge, on 06/20/2008, -9/+4I am moved with compassion at the site of your $50 dollar donation and i will raise you one million dollars!!!1
    • Pedestrian101, on 06/20/2008, -2/+2Whoa whoa whoa, he broke his word, he promised to use public financing at the beginning of the campaign.
  • MonsterChaOS, on 06/19/2008, -26/+66Just pointing out that McCain broke campaign finance laws. Way to go Obama!
    • xtinamo, on 06/19/2008, -22/+2Your screen name suits you.
      • Kiwibomb, on 06/20/2008, -0/+7how does that make sense?
        • xtinamo, on 06/20/2008, -4/+4Seriously, when you're that high.. it ALL makes sense.
        • skyroket, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1It's ChaOS, baby...it doesn't have to make sense. That or it's the new competitor to MacOS.
    • xceptionaly, on 06/19/2008, -3/+20Campaign finance laws that he himself sponsored, no less.
    • DaDrake, on 06/19/2008, -3/+12Ironic since Gore did the same thing and nobody suggested he broke finance laws. The laws are clear, as long as you don't use the money... you can return it.
    • ZenMojo, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Not that the news will point this out. In fact, Fox News was pretending that Barack Obama's lawyers never met with John McCain's lawyers even though they said they did (but McCain's lawyers denied it had anything to do with campaign financing).
  • sgiffy, on 06/19/2008, -16/+11Good for him. Public financing is a nice idea, but due to PACs and the like, a bit silly. I would rather be able to give money straight to the candidate for their use, then to have to funnel it throw other organizations.
  • iancgi, on 06/19/2008, -67/+24Looks like a Manchurian candidate to me. This guys is fake people there is no change.
    • aliengoods, on 06/19/2008, -6/+50Have you seen the Manchurian candidate? It was about a white guy who was held as a prisoner of war in Asia and brainwashed, so that when he was president he would just be a puppet, changing his positions to suit a small group of very powerful people.

      Now who does that sound like to you?
      • Simonft, on 06/19/2008, -3/+25That was one of the best replies I have seen in a long time. Take a cookie.
      • TGMD, on 06/19/2008, -19/+3Yes because he was referring to his skin colour? Oh wait. No.

        • digitul, on 06/20/2008, -1/+9wow you're really smart and totally got the point he was making! Oh wait. No.
      • twiztidsinz, on 06/20/2008, -4/+3Sounds like McSame!
      • StrawberryMacaw, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1"Now who does that sound like to you?"

        You mean what you just wrote? It sounds like Keith Olbermann. It's a great point, but you copied it from him.
    • yuutokun, on 06/19/2008, -2/+11Stop throwing terms around to sound smart if you don't actually know what they mean.
    • Zanarkand, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4Fox New is back from commercial....hurry before you miss something important...
    • bawitback, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1I agree 100%
      for the rest of north america 'the mind is a terrible thing to waste'
    • hiriumi, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1haha! I heard Ann Coulter saying that!
    • iancgi, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1Wow so Ive been accused I don't know the meaning of term I use which I obviously do. And also been labeled a fox news watching idiot.

      Sorry but thats my opinion, the look on his face has a blank emotionless stare on it. Him and his wife are both CFR globalists.
      Watch and see, mark my words. Nothing he is saying he will do.
  • oldhick, on 06/19/2008, -39/+30Come on people, this is ridiculous. While its the best move for him financially, its also going back on his word and it certainly isn't change. There were comments all over Digg praising him for taking the public funds, now he friggin lies, changes his word and you people are still all over him???
    Where is peoples decency? The issue isn't to take funds or not, the issue is holding true to your word. All that's come out of the Obama camp recently has been media manipulation (placing people at dinners by race, removing people from view of the cameras) and lies.
    Just be honest. Thats it. Just be honest.
    • dyingtolive657, on 06/19/2008, -7/+4And we're supposed to look to McCain for this honesty that you speak of?
    • gipp, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3There's a more than subtle distinction between lying and changing your mind.

      And before you start, I'm against the "flip-flopping" attacks on McCain.
    • g00ee, on 06/19/2008, -4/+3If changing your mind on an issue is lying then John McCain is one hell of a liar
    • DaDrake, on 06/19/2008, -4/+6oldhick, the two party system has create such a partisan divide in this country..... some people can't see what Obama is (A politician who will do anything to get elected).
      • bawitback, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1The peoples decency diminished. A shame to watch the modern American brain waste away.
    • germ5150, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2With McCain is taking public financing, this really is a black eye for Obama. Russ Fein gold a senior Democrat Senator said

      "Even Democratic Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, who worked with Obama on an ethics and lobbying reform bill last year, called Obama’s financing decision “a mistake” in a statement Thursday.
      “This is not a good decision. While the current public financing system for the presidential primaries is broken, the system for the general election is not,” he said."

      "McCain late today said he would accept the public money. His aides quickly seized on Obama's announcement, casting it as a broken promise."

      http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaig ...
  • digitronix, on 06/19/2008, -34/+23Obama can only do this, because there are myriads of mindless supporters that are brain washed into giving him money in the first place, since they think he offers any real 'change'.

    If you contributed to the Obama campaign, you should have kept your money and used it on something more useful like cigarettes or malt liquor.
    • ironhide, on 06/19/2008, -5/+8So, going by your digg history, you appear to be a Paul supporter. Please enlighten me on the difference between people sending Paul lots of money for his campaign and people sending Obama lots of money for his campaign. Oh wait, the people donating to the candidate you don't like are the mindless supporters and the others are just supporting the candidate they believe in. Hypocrite.
      • TGMD, on 06/19/2008, -3/+10Politics suck.
        • ironhide, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6Well, I can't argue with that. +1 insightful to you.
        • digitronix, on 06/19/2008, -1/+8I think that's something we can all agree on.
        • sherrife, on 06/20/2008, -4/+2People are dying because of politics.

          Sticking your head in the sand is not a moral or decent way to behave. It's hard, but we have to fight back.
      • digitronix, on 06/19/2008, -11/+9The difference is Paul represents REAL change.
      • oldhick, on 06/19/2008, -9/+6I would simply say the difference is that Obama made a promise and has backed out of it. Thats the problem plain and simple.
        • stormkrow, on 06/19/2008, -3/+9What promise? When?
          I think you're talking about McShame. McShame agreed orignally to "public funding" and now has backed out of it and he is being investigated by the FEC for election code violations, which may FORCE him into "public funds" and that will be more than he could ever raise from atual real people.

          Barrack has always been about grass roots small donors.
      • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/19/2008, -7/+5Ron Paul is the only real candidate who has read the constitution. Go read it yourself and see over 2/3s of the crap that both Obama and Mcain are suggesting is not ok by the constitution. GW no better "No child left behind" try "No Constitution mandate" for ANY federal $ for ANY educational program. You want federal education make an amendment otherwise you broke the law. But you Libs and Righties are fat off the gobment Tit so you let this crap slide. Jefferson is rolling over in his grave.
        • masterspeaks, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Maybe you should read the ***** constitution. As half-assed as Bush's NCLB policy was it was legal under the rules of the constitution by way of the 10th amendment and the commerce clause. Cry me a ***** river about how you don't want your tax dollars being spent on public education when you almost certainly benefited from a free public education and/or subsidies the government provide to public universities.
    • DaDrake, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6You have mindless supporters on both sides..... just young mindless supporters tend to congregate on Digg.com.

      You can downplay this obvious flip-flop, but its really sad that some people manage to praise these actions. They are blinded.
    • nardokid, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3I save money by brewing my own beer so I can donate to the Obama campaign. ;-)
      • digitronix, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2I'm glad people have a sense of humor.
  • tucsonsun13, on 06/19/2008, -32/+184This man's going to be one heck of a President.
    • Labyrinth336, on 06/19/2008, -39/+15after McCain
      • yayintertubes, on 06/20/2008, -7/+14McCunt
      • fantasmacanino, on 06/20/2008, -3/+5After McCain loses? after McCain passes away before November? C'mon, help me out here (or use punctuation).
    • bawitback, on 06/20/2008, -18/+5heck of a president of regrets, don't come to me when the status quo stays the same
      • bullox, on 06/20/2008, -0/+13Why would we come to you? Who are you again?
      • DavidGX, on 06/20/2008, -0/+6Why would we come to a retard to solve the nations problems? We tried that, bush failed miserably.
    • jabberwolf, on 06/20/2008, -15/+4Sure lies like one already!
    • dafragsta, on 06/20/2008, -7/+3Meet the new boss...

      I do think he'll be better than McCain, but I do find myself looking at him a little differently since the Bilderberg connection was made.

      This guy:
      http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/12/ ...
      was ON the Bilderberg meetup guest list. No conspiracy theory. No speculation. It's a fact. They released the guest list. His resignation came DAYS after the meeting. It's questionable whether or not Barack Obama was there. This was the evening of the mysterious meeting he supposedly had with Hillary that had him ditching a bunch of press on a plane HE was supposed to be on to go to, as his press handler put it, "secret meetings." I saw that interview, so I know this isn't speculation either.

      McCain is FAR far worse, but Barack Obama is not above being sneaky. Remember, Bill Clinton was a sheister in more ways than getting a harmless blowjob. He FINALLY admitted recently that he attended a Bilderberg meetup before he was president.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jmzWi_nhQg
    • fool13, on 06/20/2008, -7/+3If by heck you mean a ***** disaster, then sure. How can you publicly say "I AM A SUPPORTER OF PUBLIC FINANCE" then not take them. Jesus people wake the ***** up.
      • AnOMNOMymous, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Because he wants to WIN, that's why! And I want him to win, which is why i support his decision.

        Jesus, fool, wake the ***** up. Your name is a fitting one.
  • joach, on 06/19/2008, -14/+51Is it legal for foreigners in other countries to support a U.S. presidential candidate?! am serious about this question, I am a Swede and would like to support Obama's campaign. Can I do that?
    • staunchcentrist, on 06/19/2008, -2/+20To support Obama monitarily, you must be a US citizen or lawfully admitted resident according to the "donate now" legal compliance on his website.
    • apollo168, on 06/19/2008, -3/+122For every 1 Euro you give me, I will donate 1 USD to Obama's campaign for you ;-)
      • Eagle193, on 06/19/2008, -2/+7Can I join that bandwagon? ;-)
      • Aorawn, on 06/19/2008, -4/+44I see what you did there.
      • dagamer34, on 06/20/2008, -5/+19Making profit on the side eh..? Screwing over Europeans like only Americans were bred to do!
        • GoldenPearl, on 06/20/2008, -3/+2We're just better business men

          there's nothing wrong with making a little profit
        • meburnette, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1Or the Mongolians, Or the Turks, The Arabs had a good run at the Europeans as well.
      • rewinn, on 06/20/2008, -2/+12You'd best not do anything that even seems like skirting campaign finance law, unless you need a roof over your head for the next 5 to 7 years, at taxpayer expense.

        Don't worry, Obama's doing fine, and definitely doesn't need any scandals.
        • skyroket, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Don't forget the hot meals and color TVs.
      • whatcha-call-it, on 06/21/2008, -0/+2It;s not a bad idea. Tap into the huge support international for Obama over McCain and increase the dollar's value at the same time. Genius
    • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/19/2008, -42/+1why would you want to? save your money for the next election in your 3rd world nation.
      • Blackham, on 06/20/2008, -0/+11Another digger, showing his smarts!
      • Hurrz88, on 06/20/2008, -1/+6Did you seriously say that? Sweden as a 3rd world country? I don't know where your head is at, but it is obviously not on this planet. I bet you believe that every other country in this world is far inferior to the U.S. Good ol' patriot you are. Congrats on showing the world what Americans think.
        • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/20/2008, -8/+1it was a joke chill
        • TheBogie, on 06/20/2008, -5/+0If you like Sweden so much Hurrzog88 why don't you just move there?

          You know they eat fried goat balls there.

          You will probably fit in just fine.
      • Paranor01, on 06/20/2008, -0/+4Sweden is a 3rd world nation? when did that happen?
        • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/20/2008, -4/+1it was a joke. hey please read my response to your other post.
      • Fafnir43, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3Erm... Sweden's GDP per capita is 26th worldwide. So, yeah - do some research next time, ya lazy bum.
      • twiztidsinz, on 06/20/2008, -1/+5absolutely ***** retarded..
        If Sweden is a 3rd World Country, what would that make America?
        40th World Country??

        Do yourself a favor..
        Plant your feet firmly on the ground, put your hands on your legs and pull your head out of your ass.
      • rk23x, on 06/20/2008, -2/+3...the *****?
      • jmorato, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1LOL! Guys...that's a joke. Don't go menstruating quite yet.
    • DaDrake, on 06/19/2008, -5/+13No, technically its punishable by the death penalty (but as far as I know, that never happened).
    • empath, on 06/19/2008, -2/+13You can donate to a 3rd party group like media matters: http://mediamatters.org/

      You can also make calls for the campaign if you speak english well: http://my.barackobama.com/page/contact/splash/call ...

      If you really want to help, you can come over here and volunteer.
      • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/19/2008, -14/+1empath why are you encouraging a foreigner to participate in our countries sovern affairs? we don't allow that so we don't have non Americans(i.e. people who might not have our best interests at heart ) to pick our leader God what do they not teach in your school that makes you so foolish?
        • seanc6610, on 06/20/2008, -2/+5this post is exactly why i don't have a problem with a swede supporting obama. this doesn't look like satire, though it should, and it kind of scares me.
        • redbna, on 06/20/2008, -2/+4Dude! What is up with you anyway? And WHAT school did you learn that in?
        • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/20/2008, -6/+2Ok Dudes lets see how to dumb this down so you understand.

          Lets say you get to vote for your soccer team captain. And if you pick the best player you get to win.
          One of your teammates wants to let the other team help pick cuz there such cool dudes.
          He would not be doing this sabotage out of malice but ignorance. the other team will pick the worst captain they can to improve their chances of winning. Thats why other countries...no matter how nice they are should butt out of American politics. And as a patriotic American you should stop them at every chance.
        • Paranor01, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3and you would prefer what? the same american government that has wasted, crushed, and terrorised the american people into doing what they want (and their foreign interests) rather than a citizen of the world who wants to see a change in the US for the better and is willing to help even if that person is from another country? I say it's showing how much the world wants America to change to something different than what it is being now, hopefully something much better than what America is at the moment to the world.
        • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/20/2008, -4/+2Paranor01 I admire and respect your well thought out position. you make a lot of good and noble ideas sound real nice. I simply believe that if we as a country elect our own representatives then we are better of than having others pick for us. We should vote GW out for his abuse of the constitution but we should not let even the nicest swede in the world do it for us. Yahoo is a great company but they do not let Google elect their board of directors and even as rivals they seem to be good corporate citizens.
        • tbranham, on 06/20/2008, -1/+6bigsteve3000 - You are absolutely right!

          I mean, that's like suggesting to our President that we should go invade a foreign country, remove its dictator, setup a puppet government of our own, steal their natural resources, injure and kill many of its citizens (while injuring and killing many of our own troops in the process), and cause even greater instability in that country's region all in the name of American Freedom and anti-terrorism (even though that particular country has nothing to do with either of those lofty goals)! Really, how absurd! Those foreigners should learn to keep to their own business, don't you think?

          Sorry about that. I'm finished ranting.
        • Fafnir43, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3I'm sorry, but I have to call you on that. Either you don't speak English well, or you're illiterate. That means either you have very little right to talk about US "sovernty", or the average head of lettuce would be able to participate more meaningfully than you in the electoral process - even foreign lettuce.

          (Declaration of bias: I'm a UK citizen.)
        • bigsteve3OOO, on 06/20/2008, -2/+0fafnir 43 please educate me what did I say incorrectly? and tbranham I agree GW was way out of constitutional bounds but the congress let him do it they signed a bill 9/12/01 letting him declare war which is only to be done by congress. we as a country and as patriots have a duty to vote not only GW out but every congressman who did not do their duty stopping the GW war machine.
        • Danby123, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2bigsteve3000, Why would Sweden want to sabotage us? I get the soccer team example, but it would only really make sense when referring to warring nations. We don't compete with Sweden militarily or economically.

          Lets use your soccer team example. Do you think it would be okay for a crappy team from a different league that will never go against us to provide some input on the decision? I don't see the harm in that.

          (No offense Sweden)
        • rk23x, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2I think he's being satirical, but it's not funny.

          Well, at least I hope he's joking.
        • AnOMNOMymous, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3Because non Americans are smarter than Americans. That's why.
    • freemenow, on 06/20/2008, -14/+3But you already live in a Socialist country! Why force it on us? Couldn't you just take our Socialists off our hands, and let swedes who want to be free move here?

      Of course, McCain is no better. Don't blame me ... I voted Libertarian!
    • germ5150, on 06/20/2008, -12/+4Now that Obama has agreed to take money from any 527(while McCain continues down the high road by accepting public funds), you can donate to any of these 527s to help influence the election. Just pick MoveOn or Media Matters or any of the other communist groups and place your money into their hands. Please foreigners, feel free to peddle your influence in this election.

      I consider each bury 1 more person that will move to Canada after this campaign is over. :) bury away!!!
    • toink, on 06/20/2008, -1/+6I am from Amsterdam, Holland and I also would like to know and donate if it's possible/legal from outside of the US.
      • digdug2020, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3Not legal. You have to be a citizen.
  • rzxc, on 06/19/2008, -9/+68Senator Obama needs to make another announcement today. He needs to announce his opposition to the telecom immunity bill. The vote is tomorrow. We need a speech today.
    • byrdgang, on 06/20/2008, -1/+6The immunity bill is making me sick to my stomach. I can honestly say that the warrantless wiretapping is probably the most disgusting thing the Bush administration has ever done. If we can't get Bush, let's at least stick it to the phone companies.
    • splatterboy, on 06/20/2008, -3/+5you're a troll - he has already voted against immunity and has statements on his policy available on his website. But you don't really care, do you, troll...
      • an0nymous, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2Actually, you don't understand. A wiretapping Compromise bil brokered by Hoyer is going through today. Obama has raised no objections.
        It ***** breaks my heart
    • Mist0r_Wiggles, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1I won't be surprised if he endorsed it.
  • apollo168, on 06/19/2008, -9/+21It's a good idea. He gets to use more money for the campaign. If he was getting his $$$ from a few sources, it would be pretty corrupt. But Obama gets his $$$ from a boatload of regular people donating, so you know it's not to get shady $$$ from lobbyists and such. Also, doesn't this announcement come right after his meeting with Hillary on the money she owes? Perhaps it also has something to do with helping her pay back the money she owes in time to keep the Dems afloat. Either way, can we request that the public money he's not using go to renewable energy or something? I'm selfish; I want to use Barack's extra money to help our country.
  • crowbar77, on 06/19/2008, -10/+11He has no problem raising money over the internet so this really isn't a big surprise. I would have been more impressed had he announced this a year ago.
    • dexter411, on 06/20/2008, -1/+4Sorry you were buried; next time make excuses for him and you'll be fine.
  • fuzzmeister, on 06/19/2008, -14/+15He is really a victim of his own success here, as the incredible fundraising machine which he has built is forcing him to go back on his statements saying he will publicly finance his campaign.
    • Mejari, on 06/19/2008, -2/+10What statements? All he ever said was that he would try and get McCain to do it. McCain's been adamant that he wont, so what exactly is Barack changing his mind on?
      • germ5150, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1McCain is taking public financing you fool. This is just Obama backing out of his promise about not letting lobbyists and 527s control the dialogue of the campaign. What are you talking about????

        "McCain late today said he would accept the public money. His aides quickly seized on Obama's announcement, casting it as a broken promise."

        http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaig ...

        Note that this the LA times(a leftist paper) not Fox news.
      • germ5150, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1McCain is taking public financing you fool. What are you talking about???? This is just Obama allowing 527s and lobbyist to control his campaign and in effect his presidency if he wins.

        "McCain late today said he would accept the public money. His aides quickly seized on Obama's announcement, casting it as a broken promise."

        http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaig ...
    • multimed, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1Forcing him? Some people can make victims out of anyone. He's not being forced to do anything. He made the decision that he can raise more money through his website & campaign machine than he'd get from public funding. While he's just being pragmatic - it also seems pretty par for the course for a limousine liberal. Support something & rail against the system and people on the other side, but stop short of actually living by the same rules you want to force on others.
      • randumbusername, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2lol. i didn't expect the "force" angle. i knew i would read excuses but never contemplated this one.
    • whatcha-call-it, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1I don't understand how that makes him a victim. It seems like a great success to me.
  • m4532v, on 06/19/2008, -10/+13I wish he would just say ... "When I first started my campaign, I never imagined that the outpouring of my supporters would be so overwhelming and consistent. At this point I believe that it would be unfair to my supporters and would stifle their freedom of speech if I were to opt for the broken public financing system."
    • gipp, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2That is more or less what he said. Unfortunately it won't fit in a ten-second sound byte, so opponents get to twist the decision any way they like.
  • Realnemesis, on 06/19/2008, -23/+78THAT'S MY NEXT PRESIDENT!
  • Labyrinth336, on 06/19/2008, -22/+10oh... I was expecting him to finally admit to the public he is a complete moron... guess he is gunna keep feeding off the weak for votes
    • blackcloud333, on 06/19/2008, -4/+4You must be strong like bull. Wasn't labyrinth that gay movie with that gay guy starring in it,. David Bowie. Good musician though.
      • Labyrinth336, on 06/20/2008, -5/+1no Mr. Fauxbama, once again you prove your a person with a severe case of down syndrome.

        Labyrinth (Greek λαβύρινθος labyrinthos) was an elaborate structure designed and built by the legendary artificer Daedalus for King Minos of Crete at Knossos. Its function was to hold the Minotaur, a creature that was half man and half bull and was eventually killed by the Athenian hero Theseus. Daedalus had made the Labyrinth so cunningly that he himself could barely escape it after he built it.[1] Theseus was aided by Ariadne, who provided him with a fateful thread, literally the "clew", or "clue", to wind his way back again.

        The term labyrinth is often used interchangeably with maze, but modern scholars of the subject use a stricter definition. For them, a maze is a tour puzzle in the form of a complex branching passage with choices of path and direction; while a single-path (unicursal) labyrinth has only a single Eulerian path to the center. A labyrinth has an unambiguous through-route to the center and back and is not designed to be difficult to navigate.

        This unicursal design was widespread in artistic depictions of the Minotaur's Labyrinth, even though both logic and literary descriptions of it make it clear that the Minotaur was trapped in a multicursal maze.[2]

        A labyrinth can be represented both symbolically and physically. Symbolically, it is represented in art or designs on pottery, as body art, etched on walls of caves, etc. Physical representations are common throughout the world and are generally constructed on the ground so they may be walked along from entry point to center and back again. They have historically been used in both group ritual and for private meditation.
        • twiztidsinz, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3*clapclapclap* YAY!
          You can use Wikipedia!
        • Nollykin, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1O rly?
        • flashback99, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1I hear that the Republican party pay $2 for every negative comment about Obama on digg.

          I also hear Neocons are a bunch of *****.
  • peppino, on 06/19/2008, -20/+108I just donated! It was my 1st time! Even if it's only $5, it will make a difference!

    https://donate.barackobama.com
    • Labyrinth336, on 06/19/2008, -17/+9haha... you moron
    • rorster, on 06/19/2008, -9/+14If you want to make a difference, why not use your $5 to buy a homeless person a sandwich from subway?
      • StaleCookie, on 06/19/2008, -6/+1Ooohhh someone wants a $5 foot long... Seriously though. Any dotaion WILL make a difference. Same as doing nothing will help McBush.
        • Nollykin, on 06/20/2008, -1/+4You DO recognise the irony in your comment, don't you? Suggesting that someone may make a bigger difference funding a multinational corporation rather than a politician who you believe will do something good for your country?
        • rorster, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1No actually my comment has nothing to do with a multinational corporation. It was about feeding the hungry. Go let your brain fully develop and then come back and we'll finish this conversation.
      • CerMakAlot, on 06/19/2008, -0/+17Subway... is that you?
      • Nollykin, on 06/20/2008, -1/+5You DO recognise the irony in your comment, don't you? Suggesting that someone may make a bigger difference funding a multinational corporation rather than a politician who you believe will do something good for your country?
        • mattlohkamp, on 06/20/2008, -2/+4it's the difference between gambling to make money and putting it the bank to make interest - if you gamble, you might win more, but you might lose it. If you put it in the bank, you're guarenteed to make more. In other words -

          Obama might not win, but that hungry homeless guy will be fed for a day.
        • StaleCookie, on 06/20/2008, -2/+2What you call "funding a multinational corporation" I call feeding a starving crackhead. Tomato Tomato, Potato Potato...
        • flashback99, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1"Obama might not win, but that hungry homeless guy will be fed for a day."
          Your logic would work if feeding a homeless guy would rehabilitate him or her to then become a productive member of society, but it doesnt work that way im afraid.
          Only a positive, well-funded candidate can cause significant social change over 4 years. This is far better than feeding one homeless person for a day with an unhealthy sandwich.

          What does the homeless guy do tommorow? At the very least it's in Obama's future job description to cause positive social change.
      • flashback99, on 06/20/2008, -0/+4because that homeless person is not running for president you dumbass.
      • sexyfridge, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1There's another way to look at it. Let's say there's a bridge and in the middle of the bridge there's a massive hole. People try to walk across the bridge but fall through the hole into the river. What's the point of saving people drowning in the river when you can fix the hole? There will always be homeless people (like there are people in the river) unless the foundational system is changed (the hole is fixed). So i give kudos to the people who donate because i think it does more to fix the hole in the system.
        • rorster, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1Ok sexyfridge,

          I see your point to fix the problem not the symptom. I applaud your well stated point.
        • rorster, on 06/20/2008, -3/+1I do think that Obummer will lose because the only issue that will decide this election will be gas prices. So that $5 was wasted. Now do you see where I'm coming from?
      • DavidGX, on 06/20/2008, -0/+5FIVE DOLLA.. FIVE DOLLA FOOTLOOOONGS...
        • McShr3dd3r, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2I hate that jingle, yet it is so catchy......


          FIVE DOLLA..
          FIVE DOLLA FOOTLOOOONGS...
    • lazerflesh, on 06/20/2008, -3/+4I donated 15$ a few months ago, and I have my union take out a certain percentage of my paycheck for political fund raising. So once he got the nominee he got a years worth... so, that was probably around 200$ from just me along... so anyone else who is a Democrat in the home healthcare union ... yeah, that's a lot of money. :D
    • RomgRim, on 06/20/2008, -2/+3There goes your weekly allowance, huh?
    • scot333, on 06/20/2008, -2/+2be ready to be on a call list forever. You will be continually contacted by democrats after this.
      • ziptnf, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1That's not such a bad thing. I usually have friendly conversations with the Obama campaign when they call, but I don't really pledge to go canvass with them. If you donate, be expected to be interested about the candidate and his campaign.
    • kalleanka, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1That website is retarded.... I wanted to donate $50 but they don't allow me:

      "I am a United States citizen or a lawfully-admitted permanent resident."

      Well, no, I'm on a H1b working visa... why does he not want me to be able to show my support for him?
    • KH47, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1This is the first thing Obama's said or done that I like, because none of my money will go to help him. I wish McCain would do this also.
  • jjb123, on 06/19/2008, -5/+16Can someone please explain what this means? Why is everyone (MSM) upset by this?
    • jjb123, on 06/20/2008, -0/+6It was a serious question.
    • Fafnir43, on 06/20/2008, -0/+17Quick synopsis (may contain slight inaccuracies): Obama pledged that he would try "aggressively" to get McCain to run his campaign using only public (aka government) funding, and that if he succeeded he would also run his campaign using only public funding. This is because the public funding is normally used as a means of preventing undue lobbyist influence.

      A few months later, Obama is raking it in from lots and lots of small donors (/not/ lobbyists), and McCain has made it pretty clear he's not going the public funding route. So since Obama can't receive money from small donors if he takes public funding, he's decided not to take it. And a lot of people missed the "if McCain does it too" clause and are accusing him of flip-flopping.

      Others are questioning whether he tried hard enough to get McCain to take public funding, considering that given his massive base he had very little incentive to do so. (McCain said he didn't really try, Obama says he did, and since the negotiations were private we probably can't get any independent confirmation one way or the other.) Still other people are accusing him of hypocrisy because one of the major themes of his campaign has been working against the lobbyists, and the public finance route was originally created as an anti-lobbyist invention. (Although as far as I know he's still refusing to accept money from lobbyists at all, public financing or no, so this doesn't really hold water.)
      • jjb123, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Ahh, I see. Thanks.
      • jcaprario, on 06/20/2008, -2/+11You've made a mistake.

        McCain IS currently taking public funds for the general election. He just reiterated that today. Maybe you are confusing this with the primaries.
        • dexter411, on 06/20/2008, -2/+4Why were you buried? You corrected someone else's false statement.

          Digg is now just a group of yesmen. How sad...
        • Perrako, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Close -- he said the "only" public funding route. That means he is taking both public funding and private money.
      • Slackluster, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3I still don't understand. What would be the harm in him using the public funds as well as the small donors?
        • purzzzell, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2the "public funding rule" doesn't allow for small donors, b/c you can't differentiate b/t me as an individual making a donation and a lobbyist making a donation
        • dexter411, on 06/20/2008, -0/+3$85 million spending limit. Obama knows he can raise more so he rejected financing and then made up a noble excuse for it after the fact. Apparently, the "broken" part of the public finance system is that it doesn't let Obama use $300 million in a general election.
    • germ5150, on 06/20/2008, -5/+2Fafnir,
      McCain is taking public financing you fool. What are you talking about???? This is just Obama allowing 527s and lobbyist to control his campaign and in effect his presidency if he wins.

      "McCain late today said he would accept the public money. His aides quickly seized on Obama's announcement, casting it as a broken promise."

      http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaig ...
  • ksalmaan, on 06/19/2008, -9/+3Gibb2...do you sincerely believe all that?
  • MajorOutage, on 06/19/2008, -25/+19Pot, meet kettle, Kettle, meet pot.

    OH THE IRONY.
    • imhalfpirate, on 06/19/2008, -5/+0Ma meet Pa, Ma & Pa Kettle
    • StaleCookie, on 06/19/2008, -4/+5Pot, meet pipe, pipe meet mouth. OH the JOY!
    • Brad324, on 06/20/2008, -2/+6You obviously don't know what "Pot calling the Kettle black" means, as it clearly does not apply to this video. You should be beaten with a pot and a kettle, until you're black and blue for misusing this saying.
      • solodan1000, on 06/20/2008, -3/+2but obama is black, so he is a kettle....and he probably does pot
      • MajorOutage, on 06/20/2008, -3/+2Actually, I do, and it does. But that's ok. I didn't expect you to see it.
  • krystofr, on 06/19/2008, -16/+39I hope my sons grow up to be stand-up men like Barack Obama.
    • Glynth, on 06/19/2008, -20/+12So you want your boys to grow up to make promises and then purposefully break them?
      • Glynth, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1Since that's exactly what Obama's doing here, and this is the thread to discuss it, I guess we'll have to assume your answer is "Yes."
    • had3l, on 06/20/2008, -10/+3That is a sexist statement, and I reject and denounce it. What if your sons grow up to be women?

      Hey, wait a second...
    • runCMD, on 06/20/2008, -10/+2and take felony class drugs and not expect to pay for his crime ? Or hold those around him as a young man in contempt simply because they were born a different color. This is one of the problems with Obama's candidacy. People will want to emulate his path ... It's a shame someone with integrity and a clean past didn't choose to run. Obama has shown himself the ultimate hypocrite - and now, quite the liar. Go Obama. : (
      • allengeer, on 06/20/2008, -4/+3what the ***** are you talking about? so he did some coke. big ***** deal. lots of people have. it doesn't make a person an incapable leader. you stupid *****.
        • runCMD, on 06/20/2008, -4/+1You extraordinary insight overwhelms me. I'd prefer a president who was strong enough in his life to resist the temptation to take illegal drugs. I'm sure your mother told you - just because someone else does it - doesn't mean you have to ..... The exercise along with his devolution into bigotry against his 'captors' shows that Obama is weak. I prefer someone who shows strength of character under pressure. So far - he's had an easy ride in this campaign. I prefer not to witness his meltdown in the face of the next terrorist attack against American interests.
          ps: you are a moron. ( sorry, I had to retort to the silly stupid ending you placed on your post ... for those of us that block profanity ... your poetry is lost on us )
        • allengeer, on 06/20/2008, -2/+2right because you can tell all this from the decisions a 20 year old college student made in the early 80s! you are so ***** stupid and self righteous its extraordinary. I prefer someone who thinks for himself and questions the set of rules people hand to him. I dont want the leader of the free world to be a man who has followed all the rules and regulations people told him to follow his entire life. That's a follower. Not a leader. Yes my logic is, he did coke, therefor he is a better leader. You can sit there and be afraid of it your entire life, and say "NO to drugs", but all you're doing is keeping yourself from knowing what its about and why people use it.

          And from those of us that don't block profanity because we're not out of touch wanna be enlightened digg personas, "F.U.C.|<. YOU! YOU STUPID F.U.C.|<!"
        • moobies, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1successfully pwned him IMO.
        • runCMD, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1Allen - I don't think people really change over time. I think people grow into the people they want to be. I don't see life as a linear chain of isolated events that we leave behind everyday and start anew. I see life as very much vertical. Every decision .. every action ... even our thoughts build-up one upon the next to create the multi-layer rich personalities we become with age. Who you 'hang out' with, what you allow to come out of your mouth .. or go into it, the thoughts they you let your idle mind pursue all lead you into a direction you personally make the decision to go. Obama started out the same blank slate you and I did. Obama and I started out at the same time in history. He sank into self pity and personal isolation and rather than working through that emotional pain - he sank into criminal drug use. How "often" is a matter of fact not open to interpretation. Only he knows. But he did it. And while wallowing in that world of indulgence ... he decided it was better to classify white persons as captors ... and store up his personal rage against them - rather than strike out and face the reprecusssion. Had be been caught by the police while he was indulging .. he would have had a criminal record ... and you and I would not be having a conversation about him being a better candidate for the presidency. But he didn't. His life choices building upon that base - were to join a church with a very anti-american pastor preaching a bigoted message. Obama lied about never hearing those opinions from his 'close friend' and 'spiritual mentor' when asked - and only when his relation with that man began to impact his presidential bid did he choose to abandon his old friend after being called out as 'just saying those things because he's a politician' ... Obama's committment to the church ended just as abruptly becuase - after one additional speech by a visitor minister - the whole church became a 'distraction' to his campaign. These aren't isolated events that you can weigh seperately. They are a testament to the type of person his life choices have built him up to be. His character .. and apparently yours ... show just the tip of the iceberg of a long series of poor choices in life.
          Be careful of your own thoughts and actions Allen. Build yourself to be the kind of man you'd want to have as a friend. For whatever than means to you - I hope it produces as much respect for others as you command for yourself.
      • timo1teo, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2hahaha stfu runCMD and gtfo.... you block profanity on the internet??? check out 4chan.com its a perfect site for you.
        • runCMD, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1I block profanity here allen. : ) rock on.
    • flashback99, on 06/20/2008, -3/+6woah these Republican spammers are trying hard today. Don't they ever learn?
      • runCMD, on 06/20/2008, -3/+2I don't know about the Republicans - but as a strong democrat, when I see a nut, I acknowledge it's presence and move on. : ) I have not been pulled into the camp. I know I'm supposed to be ... but I find bigotry loathsome and an unapologetic criminal past despicable. Other than that - Obama's a nice guy.
        Still - I couldn't vote for someone with a past like that. What were you doing with your life while he was snorting cocaine ? I was working hard - and avoiding the temptation of opting out - as he did. Now - it's my turn to opt out on him.
        feels good ... Always stand up for what you believe in. And let the other guy stand up for what he believes in - or chooses to not to. This is the America I live in.
        • willywong, on 06/20/2008, -3/+3You write like a nut.
        • runCMD, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3There's a pot calling the kettle black.

          I write what I feel. Others agree with what I'm saying. You don't. From my perspective .. you're not a nut. You're just rude.
        • flashback99, on 06/20/2008, -1/+2woah these Republican spammers are trying hard today. Don't they ever learn?
        • allengeer, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1so your logic is, he did coke, therefor i am not voting for him. you need to do some coke.
        • runCMD, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2My logic is he did cocaine - breaking the law. Multiple times ... as often as he could afford it. Showing weakness of character and a willingness to commit felony crime as long as it suited his needs of the moment.

          Weak criminal = no vote. You have to pay for your actions. He didn't pay then. He's paying now. I'm but one little vote. So don't worry. : )
          Are you a drug user too Allen ?
        • Glynth, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1@flashback99:
          So, whoever you can't defeat in a debate is a spammer - oh, sorry, a "Republican spammer"; I almost forgot the obligatory "Republicans are evil" implications that are a necessity for any good Digger to include in their comments these days - and whatever you can't counter is spam, eh?
        • allengeer, on 06/21/2008, -0/+1I believe he said "a little blow when we could afford it" not "as often as we could afford it".
          Doing cocaine is not something that designates you as a "weak criminal". Sounds like a strong criminal to me, seeing as how he stopped doing it.

          Billions of people have done cocaine. Empires have been built and destroyed based on the drug.
        • runCMD, on 06/21/2008, -0/+2Given your options to choose ... If you had the money to choose ... do you want a new car or a used car ? A boxed refrigerator or one that sat on the showroom floor getting dinged up ? Would you rather marry a person that had slept with 20 people