What to do when your hero, whose honor cannot be questioned, does something he swore up and down he’d never, ever do? Blame it on the other guys. In to day’s New York Times, the front page lead headline reads:
Obama Yields In Marshaling of “Super PAC”
According to the Times:
Aides said the president had signed off on a plan to dispatch cabinet officials, senior advisers at the White House and top campaign staff members to deliver speeches on behalf of Mr. Obama at fund-raising events for Priorities USA Action, the leading Democratic “super PAC,” whose fund-raising has been dwarfed by Republican groups.
“Dwarfed by Republican groups?” Hmmmm. According to the Times itself, Obama this far has raised almost $140 million, while his two closest challengers combined, Romney and Gingrich, have raised only half that much. (The Center for Responsive Politics provides a complete breakdown at Banking on Becoming President _ OpenSecrets).
Further, according to The Daily Beast:
President Obama is expected to raise more than $1 billion, a record that would eclipse the one he set in 2008 when he collected $750 million.
In spite of these impressive figures, however, the President, reluctantly and with great sadness, now finds himself compelled to “yield” to the blandishments of big money. Thus do we see innocence stained, virtue smote down, and the wicked triumph. We are dismayed. But we understand. After all, as Jim Messina, the manager of Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign has pointed out to the Times:
“We’re not going to fight this fight with one hand tied behind our back.”
This is very damn bad news for the Republicans — because if the Dems have done this well with one hand behind their backs, they ought to beat the living tar out of the GOP now that they’re swinging with both fists.
We have no objections to the President employing super Pacs, Pacs, ice packs and pickaxes, if need be, to further his ambitions, but we are a little put off by this silly attempt by the Times to persuade us that our “yielding” Obama may be compelled to wallow in the fleshpots, yet still maintains his virginal purity. There’s more than a little of the disingenuous to it, when, as Lord Byron wrote about another reluctant maiden:
“A little she strove, and much repented,
And whispering, ‘I will ne’er consent’ — consented.”