Bad News For Obama

The New York Times article is titled “Obama, in Shift, Says He’ll Reject Public Financing,” but the subtitle was the more damning

Barack Obama’s decision to break a pledge to use public money will likely transform presidential campaigns, raising doubts about the future of public financing.

I’d sort of thought it was ambiguous whether there was a pledge to be broken, but that’s pretty straightforward.  Rereading the language, it does sound as if they’re intentionally preserving a tiny bit of ambiguity, but that their spirit is to clearly indicate that he would participate in public financing.

2 responses to “Bad News For Obama

  1. Like I said at my place, Obama’s move away from public financing isn’t a bad thing at all, but his justification for doing so is kind of weak. Regardless of how many people donate to his campaign, it would still be a pale approximation (in terms of the “publicness of it) of an actually publicly financed campaign.

  2. I was thinking of the tone of the coverage as the bad news–I wasn’t sure how it would go. The amount of money that he’s likely to raise will outweigh that, I’m sure.

    I still do think it’s a wee bit unscrupulous.