He should reiterate his commitment to refusing money from lobbyists and special interest PACS, emphasize that the DNC is following his lead and challenge the Republicans to do the same. Then he should say that the whole point of the public financing legislation was to limit the influence of just such donors, so he is being true to the spirit of that legislation. But not, he should add, right up front--to the letter of his original commitment, a commitment he made way back in March of--2007.
He should dwell on that date. March, 2007. Then he should say something like:
A lot has happened since then, as you know. Circumstances have changed and, when that happens, policy should sometimes change as well. Nobody dreamed that our campaign would get that outpouring of support--X million in donations of $250 dollars or less from Y millions of donors who aren't affiliated with any corporate special interest or lobbyists. That's more than Z times the number of any other candidacy in history. If I were to ignore this change in circumstances, if I were turn my back on the ordinary Americans who want to support our campaign in this way and, yes, if I were to relinquish the advantage that kind of support gives our candidacy in this watershed election--well, I really would be naïve.
Breaking promises and jettisoning his deeply held beliefs and close friends when they become political liabilities, and then trying to "frame" his actions with rhetoric is going in exactly the WRONG direction.
Whether you write-in Hillary, if possible, vote for John McCain, or sit out the election, right now, for the sake of our families and our country, WE MUST DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER to assist in the defeat of the inexperienced, ruthless, deceptive, divisive, racist black liberation theology believing, race card throwing Obama. We can always come back to the Democratic Party if and when they show a desire to respect our participation, and field an acceptable candidate.
For once the disproportion of campaign finance income redounds to the Democrats' benefit. Pretty amazing coincidence that this is *suddenly* the campaign that supposedly the American people expect complete equilateral financing between the two parties.
Facing an opponent with ALL the public money instead of only half would be good motivation for taking it.
We've got Harvey Weinstein supposedly threatening Pelosi that he and "his people" (presumably Jewish Americans) will give not one penny to any Democrat unless Hillary is chosen over Obama. So the only thing that matters is making sure Israel gets $10 billion of my money every year, and everyone in the U.S., all the homeless and sick and unemployed just do not matter. Then we've got the business lobbies, of course, who only want to continue raping and pillaging. And "Hispanic" groups claim they want open borders (too bad if it drives down wages and throws Americans out of work) and Spanish-instruction schools.
This campaign is a disgrace. Get money completely out of politics and then maybe the politicians will go back to doing their job, which is acting on behalf of the citizens of the U.S. first and only.
I would never suggest that republicans are being fair. Fairness isn't even an issue with republicans. I'm just saying I don't like seeing what used to be my party of choice become EXACTLY like the republicans.