End of public financing can't come soon enough

John McCain is said to be sad that the fundraising prowess of Barack Obama may put an end to the practice of having presidential candidates' campaigns funded by taxpayers -- that's what "public financing" is. It can't happen too soon for me. I have never understoof why it was supposed to be more moral or upright or noble to take money by force from people, half of whom typically don't bother to vote, to finance the ambitions of those who aspire to be themost powerful scoundrel in the world. I'm sure Barack Obama, who appears to be poised to win the presidency fairly handily, will do many more things to displease me than to please me once in office; every president in my lifetime has. But if he is the proximate cause of ending taxpayer funding of presidential campaigns, he will have done one good thing.

Here's the Register's editorial on the subject.

Campaign finance absurdities

There's been an interesting flap over whether Obama and McCain will accept only public financing for their general-election campaigns, as they seemed to promise to do last May. They've both been advocates of public (i.s., taxpayer) financing, but Obama especially has found he can raise a whole lot more money through voluntary contributions, and could be at a disadvantage -- or perhaps McCain would have a better shot, since Democrats have raised more money this year --with equal financing. McCain apparently used the implicit promise of taxpayer money into get a bank loan last fall. The absurdities here suggest we should get rid of taxpayer financing of elections. Why it ism considered "cleaner" or more "moral" for politicians to fund their nefarious activities through forced exactions from innocent taxpayers has always been beyond me.