<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">]>
<rss version="0.92" xml:base="http://www.publicampaign.org">
<channel>
 <title>Public Campaign -  - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Wow, I love America!
</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/06/25/immunity-for-telecoms-not-from-moneys-influence#comment-26199</link>
 <description>Wow, I love America!</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:01:43 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The debt issue is certainly</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2007/11/28/the-money-behind-the-money#comment-26191</link>
 <description>The debt issue is certainly a public attention grabber. They’ll do it to protect “homeowners” and the “economy,” but lenders will end up collecting most of the swag - agreed!</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:41:34 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Quoting Nick Nyhart&#039;s column</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/06/19/obamas-obligation#comment-26185</link>
 <description>   Quoting Nick Nyhart&#039;s column in the Huffington Post, &quot;Sen. Obama and his campaign must be clear in the weeks and months ahead about their commitment to ending a system that puts big money campaign contributors ahead of the needs and concerns of all Americans.&quot;
   I recommend that Public Campaign mount an email, telephone and letter-writing campaign to Sen. Obama&#039;s campaign offices asking him to publicly confirm support for Public Campaign Financing, and specifically for the Fair Elections Now Act.  My home organization in Florida, the Space Coast Progressive Alliance (http://www.spacecoastprogressivealliance/elections) will join the effort, and I&#039;ll bet that all of the state and local Clean Elections organizations around the country will join in as well.  
   The timing is right, while the country&#039;s attention is on the issue, that several thousand emails, letters and calls should have some impact.

Fred Markham</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:35:44 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Obama opting out is NOT understandable</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/06/19/obamas-obligation#comment-26178</link>
 <description>How is his opting out &quot;understandable?&quot;  He&#039;s raking in big corporate money too, not operating under this myth that they are all small donors. I can&#039;t believe how gullible people are. Obama just noticed the system is broken, after studying it for two years?  I don&#039;t buy it. He&#039;s opting out because he&#039;s getting lots of donations. That&#039;s the only reason. And this site, of all sites, &quot;understands&quot;??? What a cop out.
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 04:16:54 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Obama&#039;s Lie</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/06/18/bring-it-back-to-mass#comment-26174</link>
 <description>Obama just killed the credibility of public financing.  

Politicians will support it when it works to their favor, and abandon it when their own special interests dictate.</description>
 <pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:58:59 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>CAMPAIGN-FINANCE REFORM</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/06/16/views-from-all-over#comment-26153</link>
 <description>If you are interested in public financing of political campaigns, I encourage you to read my article titled &quot;REAL CAMPAIGN-FINANCE REFORM&quot;, which was printed on OpEdNews.com on May 2, 2008.  In this article, I suggest a source of revenue for public financing of political campaigns that also reduces the undue influence of large donors. </description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:01:06 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Toss Her a Brick - With the</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/05/22/meeting-notes#comment-25404</link>
 <description>Toss Her a Brick - With the most recent election we see that, once again, that fundraising and campaign finance is the most important way to win elections. A person who is really qualified is not as important as how many $$$ the person has, is able to raise. Just look at Clinton&#039;s campaign to see this. The only way she is staying is because she has alot of financial backing. If you see her site, she has 3 big banners promoting donations and giving money to her campaign. Each person should be given the same amounts, decided from the government, and no more. All candidates should be on equal terms to win the election. I felt so fed up with this, that I decided to go to the website &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bricktoss.com&quot;&gt;www.bricktoss.com&lt;/a&gt;, and toss her a brick.</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 15:40:34 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>re: spelling error</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/05/08/system-for-the-future#comment-25014</link>
 <description>Noted and corrected - thanks.</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 10:30:42 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Campaign Finance</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/02/15/show-me-clean-elections#comment-24992</link>
 <description>Like so many Missourians who believe in transparency in government, it is our hope SB1038(campaign contributions)will die this session. It keeps being moved on the calendar behind more important legislation and with one week remaining,perhaps it will be a dead issue.......this year.

</description>
 <pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2008 18:09:29 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>spelling error</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/05/08/system-for-the-future#comment-24962</link>
 <description>I appreciate this entry, but you spelled &quot;principal&quot; wrong. This will tend to diminish its impact. Keep up the good work. </description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 09:03:40 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>I think the black man should win the election.</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/04/23/in-new-york#comment-24832</link>
 <description>I think the Barack obama should win the election because he is the right leader for this great land. And I think he can do a good job. Good luck Barack</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:08:58 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Cleaner</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2007/11/16/candidate-donations-from-special-interests-up#comment-24714</link>
 <description>I agree as I do think that mandatory public financing would certainly make things a whole lot &quot;cleaner&quot;.</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:38:02 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Clean elections</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2008/04/03/cutbacks#comment-24519</link>
 <description>Cutting funding for Florida&#039;s Elections is not the way to go to obtain clean and fair elections.</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:37:17 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>when corporations give huge</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2006/07/28/crude-conflict-of-interest#comment-24482</link>
 <description>when corporations give huge &quot;donations&quot; to political candidates, that candidate is going to owe somebody something down the line... it&#039;s a broken system, but what are you gonna do?</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:38:16 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>limited terms</title>
 <link>http://www.publicampaign.org/blog/2007/07/24/reform-in-tennessee#comment-24299</link>
 <description>Though I do not live in Tennessee I plan to move there soon.  I am &quot;just checking things out&quot; so to say.  What do you think of limited terms.  Don&#039;t leave them up there long enough to become corrupted.  </description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:20:24 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
