So, the Republicans finally went there (again). The "Republican Trust Pac is putting more than $2.5 Million into swing states to run an add with the slogan "Hate We Can Believe In" connecting Obama and Ayers.
Of course, Republicans and the McCain camp have been hammering Obama for breaking his promise on accepting public campaign financing.
This commercial (and others like it) clearly illustrates why there was no broken promise.
First, The commercial
Obama's face over a blue background and image of Reverend Wright, with the slogan: "Hate We can Believe in" And the voiceover-
"For 20 years Barack Obama followed a preacher of hate and said nothing as Wright raged against our country," the ad says, as reported by ABC News' Rick Klein. "He built his power base in Wright's church. Wright was his mentor, adviser and close friend. For 20 years Obama never complained -- until he ran for president. Barack Obama. Too radical. Too risky."
The closing image in the ad is a table, presumably supposed to be in Sen. Barack Obama's home or office, on which sit a wedding day picture, a photograph of Obama and Wright, and a family picture of Barack, Michelle, Malia, and Sasha Obama.
Yes, in a commercial about black people hating America, the Republicans include pictres of Obama's pre-teen daughters.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/...
Second, McCain's response-
A McCain surrogate said, on MSNBC this morning, that candidates are not traffic cops, have a lot to do, and can't be expected to keep other commercials in check. She refused to distance the McCain campaign from a commercial that insinuates that the Obama family, including his daughtors, hate America.
Third, Obama's "pledge" to accept public financing.
On February 20, 2008, Obama pledged to seek an agreement to control spending in the presidential campaign. The agreement would not only need to limit personal spending, but should seek to control spending from outside groups funding smear campaigns.
As USA TODAY has critically observed, outside groups have come to spend tens of millions of dollars "independently," while the candidates they favor with these ads "wink and nod" at this activity. There is an even greater risk of this runaway, sham independent spending now that the Supreme Court has wrongly opened the door to more of it in a recent decision.
I propose a meaningful agreement in good faith that results in real spending limits. The candidates will have to commit to discouraging cheating by their supporters; to refusing fundraising help to outside groups; and to limiting their own parties to legal forms of involvement. And the agreement may have to address the amounts that Senator McCain, the presumptive nominee of his party, will spend for the general election while the Democratic primary contest continues.
In l996, an agreement on spending limits was reached by Sen. John Kerry and Gov. William Weld in their Massachusetts Senate contest. They agreed to limits on overall and personal spending and on a mechanism to account for outside spending. The agreement did not accomplish all these candidates hoped, but they believe that it made a substantial difference in controlling outside groups as well as their own spending.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/...
Obama did not promise to take public funding and an agreement was not found. McCain (and his surrogates) see no need to curb hateful and dishonest campaigns like this new "Hate" commercial.