"He's not saying that the system is healthy or good," said Obama spokesman Jay Carney, who was pressed repeatedly about whether Obama's move was hypocrisy. "He is making the decision, his campaign is making the decision, that the rules are what they are. And they cannot play by a different set of rules than Republicans are playing."
That's not consistent with what Obama has said about the groups. And now, by putting strategy above all else, Obama opened himself to criticism that he had compromised on principle and succumbed to the rules of the same Washington game he had pledged to change.
Obama has opposed the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in the Citizens United case. It stripped away certain limits on campaign contributions and led to the explosion of outside fund-raising groups, which can receive donations from nonprofit groups that conceal donors. The new super PACs can't coordinate directly with campaigns but have already played a major role in the Republican primary contests, supporting millions of dollars' worth of negative advertising in Iowa, South Carolina, and Florida.
During his 2010 State of the Union speech, Obama accused the Supreme Court of reversing "a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections."
Months later, campaigning for Democrats before the 2010 midterm elections, Obama railed against corporate interests spending money directly to sway federal elections, calling it a "threat to our democracy."
