Archive - Feb 23, 2008 - topic

Date
Type
John McCain and Russ Feingold, at the pinnacle of reform
The Associated Press

John McCain (rear) and Russ Feingold pushed a comprehensive campaign-finance law overhaul. Will GOP frontrunner McCain adhere to the spirit of reform?

Featured Topic | Posted 38 weeks 3 days ago

Should taxpayers fund presidential campaigns?

Politicians make and break promises all the time, but when it comes to campaign-finance reform, it's tough for a champion of reform to suddenly change his mind about accepting spending limits. And it's just as difficult for an upstart challenger to promise to use public financing when he's down in the polls and renege when he's surging.

Such is the dilemma facing John McCain and Barack Obama, who both pledged last year to abide by public financing and spending limits and who now are having second thoughts.

Should the candidates be held to their pledges? Should private contributions be banned? Or should taxpayer dollars fund presidential campaigns at all?

Read More

Ben likes: McCain has his cake and eats it too

Katherine Mangu-Ward/Reason

When public funds are used as a guarantee for a loan being taken explicitly so that the candidate can stay out of the public financing system, surely it is time to throw in the towel. The FEC rules, like most of the byzantine campaign-finance-reform legislation that bears McCain's name, just makes more work for clever lawyers, who can always figure out a workaround.

As campaigns get longer and longer and more and more expensive, candidates are reluctant to accept spending caps, which is essentially what public financing amounts to. Public funding has always been a chimera, and, as his campaign's tactics reveal, no one knows that better than John McCain.

Read More

Joel likes: The problem of Obama's public financing "pledge"

Jerome Armstrong/MyDD

Obama would be well-served to either fold up his "pledge" or "commitment" or whatever you want to call it, and take a bit of heat now, or else, say he's going to do public financing and be done with it, but trying to finesse the issue only serves up more ammo to McCain for his character attacks on Obama. We all know that swiftboating the credibility of the Democratic nominee's 'word' will be the Republicans' choice of attack, so don't give them ammo.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
Afghanistan
The Associated Press

A U.S. soldier in Afghanistan

Featured Topic | Posted 38 weeks 3 days ago

Was Obama's Army anecdote the truth or a lie?

Conservative bloggers are skeptical of this claim by Barack Obama at Thursday's Democratic debate:

"You know, I've heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon," Obama said. "Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.

Read More

Ben likes: U.S. troops scavenging weapons?

Michael Goldfarb/Weekly Standard

So Obama never actually spoke with the captain, which means he can reasonably claim the tale was garbled in transmission. It is possible that an American unit was ill-equipped for combat, these things happen in the fog of war, and they have happened with troubling frequency in this war as in every other. Which is not to diminish any failure on the part of the administration or the military leadership in providing U.S. forces with the equipment they need. But is this particular story true?

Our troops never rotate into theater before running through a series of inspections which ensure that they're properly equipped, and we've never heard a report of soldiers having to scrounge for ammo. If we did, we'd join the Senator in raising hell. In Obama's telling the blame lies with President Bush, but the story is perfectly vague and based on nothing but hearsay. We expect there will be a lot of folks that want to get to the bottom of this, whether the facts supports Obama's version or not.

Read More

Joel likes: Obama's Army anecdote

Jake Tapper/ABC News

The Captain has spoken to Sen. Obama, he says, but this anecdote was relayed to Obama through an Obama staffer.

I find that Obama's anecdote checks out.

Some are quibbling about whether or not the "commander in chief" can be held responsible for how well our soldiers are being equipped, since Congress provides the funding for the military, but the Pentagon (and ultimately President Bush) are in charge of the funding mechanism.

I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem, which is certainly not new. That is, if they actually care about the men and women bravely serving our country at home and abroad.

Read More

How readers are voting

your vote
average
vote
The Associated Press

Iranian students protest U.N. sanctions against Tehran's nuclear program.

Featured Topic | Posted 38 weeks 4 days ago

If Iran is lying about nukes, what should the U.S. do?

The U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Friday it confronted Iran for the first time with Western intelligence reports showing work linked to making atomic bombs and that Tehran had failed to provide satisfactory answers. The new information could spur more international sanctions against the mullahs. So far, though, existing sanctions have done little to undermine Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Are stronger sanctions the way to go? Should the United States take a different tack: face-to-face negotiations? Or should America prepare to use force to prevent Iran from acquiring a working atom bomb?

Read More

Ben likes: Attack Iran... with words

Reuel Marc Gerecht/The New York Times

For those who believe that the clerics who rule Iran must never have an arsenal of nuclear weapons, the United States’ course of action ought to be clear: The Bush administration should advocate direct, unconditional talks between Washington and Tehran. Strategically, politically and morally, such meetings will help us think more clearly. Foreign-policy hawks ought to see such discussions as essential preparation for possible military strikes against clerical Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Read More

Joel likes: Too easy to refuse

New York Times

So the fact that the major powers are still talking about even limited sanctions may surprise some in Tehran. But apparently even Moscow and Beijing have no doubts about the danger of Iran’s overt nuclear efforts. The longer Iran defies the Security Council and continues to enrich uranium, the closer its scientists get to mastering the skills for building a weapon. Without stronger punishments and stronger incentives, Iran is unlikely to halt its efforts.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote