I think "hypocrisy" is a bit of a strong word here. There isn't necessarily a contradiction between liking Obama's style of fundraising, and thinking that he should still limit himself and take public financing.

McCain, his surrogates, and the media have been crucifying Obama on his rejection of fed campaign funding. This shows once again the total hypocrisy of McCain, not just on campaign finance, but on lots of issues. It's incredible the way McCain & his surrogates self-righteously and piously allege hypocrisy and dishonesty by Obama, while they are the real hypocrits.

There's no hypocrisy. McCain supports raising small donations from average citizens but opposes taking large donations from special interest groups. Obama is doing both. McCain's point is that for all his talk about a new kind of politics, Obama is taking big donations from all the typical Democratic special interest groups.

This isn't necessarily hypocrisy, because McCain supported small-time contributions, not rejection of public financing in 2004. It's all moot - campaigners will snatch up every borderline issue and magnify trivialities. In the big picture, McCain is no maverick, no progressive, and barely lucid. Obama is no saint either, but at least he isn't abandoning medical cases for wives to marry young and rich heiresses. Or calling the Iraq debacle a whole success because a recent decrease in violence.

There's no hypocrisy. McCain supports raising small donations from average citizens but opposes taking large donations from special interest groups. Obama is doing both. McCain's point is that for all his talk about a new kind of politics, Obama is taking big donations from all the typical Democratic special interest groups.

There's no hypocrisy. McCain supports raising small donations from average citizens but opposes taking large donations from special interest groups. Obama is doing both. McCain's point is that for all his talk about a new kind of politics, Obama is taking big donations from all the typical Democratic special interest groups.

There's no hypocrisy. McCain supports raising small donations from average citizens but opposes taking large donations from special interest groups. Obama is doing both. McCain's point is that for all his talk about a new kind of politics, Obama is taking big donations from all the typical Democratic special interest groups.

This is completely misleading. McCain criticized Obama for breaking a campaign pledge. He did not criticize him for taking small donations from average people. There is a huge difference. Stop the political bias and report something half accurate.

@Ari

Don't just say the same thing over and over again to get your point across.

BACK IT UP.

Show us specific examples, with documentation, that Obama is taking large donations from "special interest groups".

Who are "all the typical Democratic special interest groups"? What money have they donated to him?

As for the "hypocrisy" of McCain - I don't really see how his comments from 2004 make him a hypocrite now.

That seems like quite a stretch.

Oh me oh my who took me mojo. Yikes!

JT
www.FireMe.to/udi

LOL, McCain is such an Airhead. What a joke. Surely no one is taking "McBush" seriously.

JT
http://www>FireMe.to/udi

It's worse than hypocrisy. McCain is attacking Obama for breaking his word, but McCain is breaking the law by violating primary season spending limits that he is legally bound to abide by.

The Washington Post reported on this, but everyone needs to know. McCain is breaking the law with every dollar he spends.

This is about two products; A and B. each promises to relieve headaches. Product A earn $3 for every $1 that product B earns. Conclusion: It must be that consumer prefer product A, especially since they sell for exactly the same price. In order words, the maximum you can donate to each campaign is exactly the same, thus, each product cost the same. Now, product B is crying because product A is preferred. Product B wants a level playing field. Product B suddenly does not believe in competitive advantage, which is a market force. B wants socialism all of a sudden. McCain is product B. Stop crying. Obama is going to eat your lunch, your dessert and your dinner.

This is about two products; A and B. each promises to relieve headaches. Product A earn $3 for every $1 that product B earns. Conclusion: It must be that consumer prefer product A, especially since they sell for exactly the same price. In order words, the maximum you can donate to each campaign is exactly the same, thus, each product cost the same. Now, product B is crying because product A is preferred. Product B wants a level playing field. Product B suddenly does not believe in competitive advantage, which is a market force. B wants socialism all of a sudden. McCain is product B. Stop crying. Obama is going to eat your lunch, your dessert and your dinner.

Prove it.

THAT WAS TO ARI.

You like everyone else can say whatever you want. But you are going to have to prove what you are saying about BIG DONORS. I want to know, and so does everybody else. PROVE IT.

Otherwise you are a megaposting windbag.

Obama is a hypocrit. He sold out to the establishment, the big money New York money types. Only Ralph Nader keeps it real and is not a sell out. Vote Green, be Green.

It is one thing to consider a topic from an unbiased view and when that topic is killing your Presidential Race!Kind of like being Pro-Life when it doesn't cost you anything and you can feel real self-righteous or Gay and delude yourself into thinking you are married!