Maybe it's because my supply has been used up, but I am having a hard time summoning outrage over a recent decision by Barack Obama that people tell me I am supposed to be outraged about.
Obama recently decided not to accept public financing of his general election campaign.
This means that instead of getting about $84 million in taxpayer funds for his campaign, Obama will raise the money from people who want to contribute to his campaign.
Those people will still be regulated by federal campaign laws — nobody can give more than $2,300 — and Obama's campaign says that 80 percent of all the funding he has received so far has come from contributions of $100 or less.
Obama is refusing public financing because he intends to raise way more money than $84 million. And this will put his Republican opponent, John McCain, at a disadvantage, if he sticks with public financing.
Money has always been extremely important to the Obama campaign. Way back in 2007, his record-breaking fundraising was what prompted the press to sit up and notice him. Money was, in the eyes of the media, what made Obama a "serious" candidate.
Money also bought Obama some very important things, such as the staff and advertising to compete in caucus states, which everybody thought Hillary Clinton was going to win, but that Obama ended up winning.
Having found that money impresses people and buys you cool stuff, Obama is now reluctant to give it up.
True, he had previously promised to "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election," and now he is not going to do that.
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who is a big supporter of McCain, recently said of Obama's decision: "This is a game-changer in terms of the general election. This will not go unnoticed by the American people."
Except that it probably will. I am not saying that the American people are totally indifferent to how politicians raise their money. I suppose if you had a videotape of Obama or McCain actually sticking up a 7-Eleven to get campaign funds people might care enough for it to become a "game-changer."
But under one system the governments hands you the money to run your campaign, and under another system people give it to you. Is that a big deal?
Some say yes. They say that Obama has promised to be the candidate of "change" and this decision shows that he is not.
But I am not so sure. I think he is a changed and different kind of Democrat.
He is one who intends to win.
