Goldfarb points out that Barack Obama is getting ready to backtrack on his promise to accept public financing. On the left, there will be claims that he didn't exactly promise to accept public financing; that he merely suggested he might. The last time there was a flareup over Obama's pledge, his supporters pointed to this New York Times piece from March, 2007, when Obama pledged to “aggressively pursue an agreement” with his Republican opponent. They conveniently forgot his statement to the Midwest Democracy Network:

If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?

Yes. In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election...

Even if Obama's backers forget this clear and definitive promise, they can't claim that Obama has fulfilled the rest of his promise: to aggressively pursue a public-financing agreement with his Republican opponent. John McCain appears likely to accept public financing; he has even 'gone the extra mile' and criticized third parties who have attacked Obama -- pretty strong evidence of a willingness to make an effort to discourage independent expenditures.

So how can Obama in good conscience go back not only on his promise to accept public financing, but even to negotiate with McCain regarding the same? Is this the new kind of politics that Obama promises?