Speaking on background, a source in the Obama campaign admitted to a certain frustration with the current narrative of their candidate "moving to the center" on issues where the Illinois Democrat has always staked out moderate ground. When talking about a gradual pullout from Iraq during the primary season, for example, Obama took some abuse from the "immediate withdrawal" crowd for his repeated mantra that "we should be just as careful getting out" of Iraq as we were "careless getting in." (And indeed, as represented by the "Responsible Plan" website, that kind of talk is firmly in the mainstream of activist anti-Iraq war sentiment anyway.) In the aftermath of Obama's FISA repositioning, the Obama campaign's fear, however, is that every subsequent moderate noise will be interpreted as a cynical centrist tack.
I'm worried this sounds like a campaign floating the idea that they might move their position on Iraq. They seem to be trying to prepare the ground that Obama has always been for gradual withdrawal from Iraq. Here's the thing, almost no one is for immediate withdrawal. That's a straw man argument. So, why are they now bringing up this gradual withdrawal point? I think bending on his 16 month timeline for withdrawal during the general election campaign is a terrible idea. I explain why below:
There is a difference between moving to the center and moving to the right. There is a difference between making tough choices about Iraq once you get into office and flip-flopping in the middle of the campaign. There is a difference between being moderate and being weak. Changing your position on such a central issue would be taken as a tremendous sign of weakness. They better not even be thinking about it.
Obama didn't come this far by running a traditional campaign. Why would you switch now and go back to running the same old conventional losing campaign that Democrats have run for so long? Appeasing the right brings you no political friends. It just brings you justified scorn from both sides. Go with what brought you here, not some cheap old political tricks.
Watch the Best Political Commentary (And More) on The Young Turks You Tube Channel
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 6)
61. Please give all credit and research to:
Capt. Marshal Hanson, U.S.N.R (Ret.)
Capt. Scott Beaton, Statistical Source
Dedmanrisn at 1:57AM on Jul 3rd 2008
xxxx
I looked up what they wrote on half a dozen right wing websites.
There was NOT ONE MENTION OF JOHN KERRY
You're as much a liar as the swift boat phonies for fascism. If you have to lie to get over on something that was over forty years ago and no one is wasting a vote on anyway, you'd have been better off havin' a beer and letting rush do your lifting.
And for what? Mccain is still the flipflopper and obama's still going to win.
Clif Kuplen at 2:25AM on Jul 3rd 2008
62. http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9111.html
flipflops...
Clif Kuplen at 11:04AM on Jul 3rd 2008
63. Oh,I don't know honey,sometimes I just get tired of
ya',it,it's yer hairspray or something......
Erronious
BOB JOHNSON at 1:20PM on Jul 3rd 2008
64. You're as much a liar as the swift boat phonies for fascism. If you have to lie to get over on something that was over forty years ago and no one is wasting a vote on anyway, you'd have been better off havin' a beer and letting rush do your lifting.
And for what? Mccain is still the flipflopper and obama's still going to win.
Clif Kuplen at 2:25AM on Jul 3rd 2008
----------------------------------------------------
Sure Clif, whatever you say, you'd have no problems enlightening us with your military exploits would you? You've uses "swiftboating" to make a point, you going to defend "Christmas in Cambodia" as Kerry mis-speaking or Genghis Khan having a field telephone? How many amps can you get from a hand-cranked telephone REMF? AC or DC current? Face it, Kerry lied then, he lies now and if he's not cremated, he will still be lieing if he wears his ribbons from the military. The American people aren't as ignorant as you would like them to be...they want drilling despite what the leftists and whack-jobs in the enviro-movement say. Auf weidersein herr Clif, Reich Minister Goebbels sagt dass sie ein guter kursteilnehemer in der schule sind.
Ded at 1:30AM on Jul 4th 2008
65. Flip-Flop is not necessarily a "bad" thing.
Life and learning is in a constant state of flux. Every day you learn new things and gain more experience in wisdom, changing your mind on some things is a natural and wise reaction to knew information and more experience. If you were driving to work on the interstate and a traffic report said there was a large traffic jam on the route you were taking, would you still drive straight to the traffic jam if you had other alternatives? I hope you are brighter than that. If you took the backroad instead, would you still be a person of principal? I hope using your common sense doesn't weaken your image or reputation. Unfortuntely, George W Bush did not flip-flop when the war in Iraq was getting started. He had the chance to take into account conflicting information about the reality of WMDs and then had the chance to change his mind again when the war effort began to resemble Vietnam. Rather than do the right thing and USE the new information he had, he was afraid of be called weak and a flip-flopper and thus continued making the same mistakes over and over again. I would much rather be lead by a person with the wisdom of flexibility and learning, rather than a stalwart and stubborn individual that cannot adjust to new realities.
Todd at 2:31PM on Jul 4th 2008
66. looked up what they wrote on half a dozen right wing websites.
There was NOT ONE MENTION OF JOHN KERRY
You're as much a liar as the swift boat phonies for fascism. If you have to lie to get over on something that was over forty years ago and no one is wasting a vote on anyway, you'd have been better off havin' a beer and letting rush do your lifting.
And for what? Mccain is still the flipflopper and obama's still going to win.
Clif Kuplen at 2:25AM on Jul 3rd 2008
---------------------------------------------------
Cap'n Crunch: The material I posted was facts regarding Vietnam and myths about same. I never said it was about Kerry and the information was not about Kerry, so why is it you are trying to get Kerry involved in it?
As for bringing up a 40 year old topic, you do it everytime you bash McCain, then call me a liar? You disengenuous prick. You constantly shill for the left, denigrate other posters and give the impression you were somebody. Of course you were.
Go tell the swiftboat sailors that they don't know what they are talking about. It wasn't that big a group and news travels fast, but that was 40 years ago wasn't it?
Ded at 5:25PM on Jul 4th 2008
67. Obama, the empty suit, cannot be trusted. Vote for the patriot John McCain for honesty and integrity. Obama's inexperience and lack of judgement spell disaster for our country.
Angela V. at 5:26PM on Jul 4th 2008
68. Auf weidersein herr Clif, Reich Minister Goebbels sagt dass sie ein guter kursteilnehemer in der schule sind.
Ded at 1:30AM on Jul 4th 2008
xxx
so mccain's lying?
Clif Kuplen at 7:40PM on Jul 5th 2008
69. You've uses "swiftboating" to make a point, you going to defend "Christmas in Cambodia" as Kerry mis-speaking or Genghis Khan having a field telephone?
xxxx
I said the swift boat phonies for fascism lied and didn't earn their medals. It's not exactly news anymore.
So either they did lie and didn't earn their medals or John Mccain is lying when he said that
I also said you phonied up the facts and myths piece you C&P'd from some wingnut website or the other. I found it only on those, and NONE contained the part you inserted on Kerry and then credited to your sources. You are as phony as Bush saying mcsame supported the GI Bill WHEN HE VOTED AGAINST IT.
Whatever Oprah said to that million little pieces guy, same to you, dittohead.
What I don't understand is what you think you're going to gain. You know it's all a lie, and it doesn't matter to you and you know your party wipes its butt on you.
What dittoheads get out of the process except one kick in the nuts after another is beyond me.
Clif Kuplen at 7:55PM on Jul 5th 2008
70. Obama's inexperience and lack of judgement spell disaster for our country.
XX
The experience of richard cheney and donald rumsfeld brought you the disaster that is now our country.
Clif Kuplen at 7:57PM on Jul 5th 2008
71. We have many more articles on flip, flopping..please join our discussions too..
at least you knew where Hillary stood.
http://hillaryisourchoice.com/simplemachinesforum/index.php
druidmary at 4:54PM on Jul 6th 2008
72. Yep. Just like he flip-flopped with his religion.
Power hungry people pleaser.
People pleaser sleazer for your vote.
Christian at 5:28PM on Jul 7th 2008
73. Obama is a great manipulator and will say anything to win, at which point he will do his best to change our country- into a socialist nation. His left wing liberal views are well known, his intentions to increase taxes on the "wealthy" will cause massive loss of jobs, which suits him fine because then his government will be "forced" into increasing social programs which only serve to create more people dependent on government. He will cause an increase in a vicious downward spiral.
Obama is not a change I want to live through.
AlyBlack at 12:02PM on Jul 8th 2008
74. Obama tried to hide his 3 week stay in Pakinstan from the public..While he was a college student. That's why he didn't want his passport information to get out..
Wonder what Obama learned while staying with these People..
It all sounds very innocent, "a college trip to Pakistan".
Pakistan was in turmoil in 1981 and ruled of martial law. Millions of Afghan refugees were living in Pakistan, while the Afghan Mujahedeen operated from bases inside Pakistan in their war with the Soviets.
One of the leaders that based his operation in Quetta, Pakistan was Usama Bin Laden (The Sheik).
Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business.
There would be only a few reasons a young Westerner of the Muslim faith would travel to Pakistan in 1981:
To Participate in Jihad, which is the duty of every "True Believer".
For religious education in a Wahabbi sect, Saudi funded, Madrassa.
In order to purchase drugs from the drug marketplace.
Pakistan was not a tourist stop nor the place to hang out with someone's family in 1981.
Wonder where else Obama traveled.. Soon the public will find out i'm sure.. Wait and see what is exposed....
Now take into account Obamas Uncle Wright..
WHAT OBAMA DOESN'T WANT VOTERS TO KNOW ABOUT HIS UNCLE WRIGHT..
http://infidelsarecool.com/2008/03/20/rev-wright-got-his-masters-degree-in-islam-in-west-africa/
Wrights Own Words..
Most of our members do not know that my Master’s Degree from the University of Chicago’s Divinity School was in the area of Islam in West Africa during the 19th Century — when the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade was at its zenith. Islam has as many manifestations as Christianity and Judaism.
Rev Wright teacher of Islam was a Dr.Fazlur Rahman..
Once the election was underway, Barack Hussein Obama was very careful to promote himself as a Christian and the keystone of his Christian identity was Trinity Church, a Church shaped around a former Muslim whose Divinity School Masters Degree was on Islam and who used the Church to preach hatred for America and support for terrorism. That man of course is Jeremiah Wright.
With the revelations that Jeremiah Wright is a former Muslim and received his Masters degree from the University of Chicago’s Divinity School on Islam in Africa– Obama’s affiliation with Wright’s Trinity Church takes on a whole new meaning.
When Obama attended Wright’s Trinity Church, was he really attending a Church or a Mosque that Wright had built with a Christian facade over it.
Wright has admitted to incorporating ideas from Black Muslims into Trinity. He himself is a former Muslim who promotes an Islam centered view of America and Israel as demon states. There are Synagogues that are actually Churches dedicated to targeting Jews. Muslims have been covertly imitating some of this. There is a Jews for Allah and Muslims have been trained to lead religious discussions with Christians by equating Christianity with Islam , proclaiming that they too believe in Jesus. If there are Messianic Christian synagogues, why not a Prophetic Christian mosque?
Either way, the Church that Obama was attending had more in common with a Mosque than with a conventional Church. It was led by a former Muslim whose specialty was and is Islam. A former Muslim who hates America and Israel and who preaches ideas that are basically Black Muslim ideas. So Obama’s claim that Trinity Church normalizes him as a Christian goes out the window, because Trinity Church is no mainstream Christian Church. It’s as close as anyone can come to attending a Mosque without actually attending a Mosque.
Consider Obama’s “I’m not a Muslim” defense reverted back to square one. Or is that Mosque one.
Also Obama’s Chicago church reprinted a manifesto by Hamas that defended terrorism as legitimate resistance, refused to recognize the right of Israel to exist and compared the terror group’s official charter – which calls for the murder of Jews – to America’s Declaration of Independence.
copy of manifesto.... Guess Obama didn't see this one either...
...http://www.bizzyblog.com/wp-images/TUCChamasColumn072207.jpg
This is how Obama learned to lie so well..
http://www.islam-watch.org/Warner/Taqiyya-Islamic-Principle-Lying-for-Allah.htm
here is how taqiyya is used in america..
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-9730604_ITM
Go back and review al of Obama's rallies and debates, and you witness a highly skilled taqiyya-tactican in each and every one...
http://bp1.blogger.com/_gO3ai_bAh-s/R93MDtVAJTI/AAAAAAAAAOE/UprkqEWVBRA/s1600-h/obama_wright.jpg
Jim2u at 6:03PM on Jul 9th 2008
75. WASHINGTON - In July of 2004, the day after his speech at the Democratic convention catapulted him into the national spotlight, Barack Obama told a group of reporters in Boston that the United States had an "absolute obligation" to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.
The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster," he said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. "It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective."
The statements are consistent with others Obama made at the time, emphasizing the need to stabilize Iraq despite his opposition to the US invasion. But they also represent perhaps his most forceful language in depicting withdrawal from crisis-ridden Iraq as a betrayal of the Iraqi people and a risk to national security.
Obama spoke out passionately against the war in 2002 as an Illinois state senator, while many in Congress were silent. But his thinking on how to resolve the crisis in Iraq evolved.
During his 2004 Senate race, he supported keeping troops in Iraq to stabilize the country. But starting in 2005, as violence engulfed the country, he grew increasingly disillusioned.
Now, Obama's views about the war have become a campaign issue, as Hillary Clinton - who voted for the war's authorization - has questioned whether Obama has been consistent in opposing the war.
Her husband, Bill, said Obama's depiction of his longstanding opposition to the war was a "fairy tale." And yesterday, news of an Obama adviser's comments that his promise to withdraw troops within 16 months represented only a "best-case scenario" further fanned questions about his Iraq views.
Yesterday, Obama struck back, declaring that Clinton "doesn't have any standing to question my position on this issue." And he added that, "I will bring this war to an end in 2009, so don't be confused."
In 2004, while supporting the Democratic presidential nominee, John F. Kerry, Obama endorsed Kerry's view that the United States had too much at stake in Iraq to withdraw at that time. Since joining the Senate in 2005, Obama has taken incrementally tougher positions on Iraq, even as he sought to hear from a wide variety of voices about what should be done there, according to aides, advisers, and transcripts of his speeches.
In November of 2005, after it had become clear that US troops faced a raging insurgency, Obama argued in a speech before the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations that the US military should scale down its presence, but that US troops were "still part of the solution" in Iraq.
We have to manage our exit in a responsible way," he told the council, "at the very least taking care not to plunge the country into an even deeper and perhaps irreparable crisis."
more stories like this
In January of 2006, Obama took his first trip to Iraq, staying two days, and while there he heard conflicting views on whether US troops should stay or go.
He expressed frustration with the failure of Iraqi leaders to resolve key disputes, telling reporters that "if we have not seen significant progress over the next few months, we need to have an honest conversation with Iraqis as to what our investment is."
But 2006 unfolded as a year of sectarian bloodshed, deepening Obama's conviction that the US effort was being squandered. He began to call for a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops. By that time, the call was far from unusual, however; other senators had called for a phased withdrawal earlier.
"The notion that the United States can't be more committed to the future of Iraq than Iraqis became much more of the prominent view" among Democrats and even some Republicans in 2006, said Rand Beers, a former foreign policy adviser to Kerry.
By November of that year, voters across the nation expressed anger over Iraq, handing control of Congress to Democrats.
A month later, the Iraq Study Group recommended reducing US military support for Iraq's government if its leaders failed to make progress on achieving political agreements.
An author of that report, Benjamin Rhodes, later joined Obama's campaign as a foreign policy adviser, and Obama adopted some of the group's language in his 2007 bill calling for all combat brigades to be withdrawn by March of 2008.
As Obama mulled a presidential run, he began to reach out to a series of military leaders, including those who did not agree with him on Iraq.
When Richard Danzig, a former Navy secretary, organized two meetings for Obama with retired military officers, Danzig asked whether he should invite officers who opposed Obama's views. The answer was yes, Danzig recalled.
"One of the attractive things about Obama is the desire to get a range of views and process them himself rather than get a homogenized product or exclude people who aren't in sympathy with him," Danzig said.
In a separate meeting, Obama asked General Anthony Zinni, a critic of the war effort, what should be done in Iraq. Zinni told him: "I don't think you can abandon Iraq. The region is too important."
Despite those views, Obama's foreign policy advisory team began working on a detailed plan for bringing US troops home and managing the potential humanitarian crisis that could follow.
Obama's campaign set up a working group on Iraq, headed by Colin Kahl, a security studies professor at Georgetown University. In July 2007, Obama's top advisers and Iraq specialists, including Kahl, produced a memo that shaped Obama's core Iraq views, made public in a Sept. 12 speech: to bring home one to two combat brigades each month, with all brigades out in 16 months, and keep only a small number of troops in Iraq to protect US diplomats and launch limited, targeted strikes on Al Qaeda.
But this week, Obama adviser Samantha Power caused a stir when she told BBC's "Hard Talk" that Obama "will revisit" the plan when he becomes president.
"You can't make a commitment in March of 2008 about what circumstances are going to be like in January 2009," said Power, who resigned from the campaign yesterday over separate comments insulting Clinton. "He will, of course, not rely upon some plan that he has crafted as a presidential candidate or a US senator. He will rely upon an operational plan that he pulls together in consultation with people on the ground."
Obama insisted yesterday he would stick to his plan. But Walter Russell Mead, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said voters should expect Obama's views on the war to shift.
"If you look at Obama's stands, he has taken different stands, or differently nuanced stands, based on his perceptions of the changing realities on the ground," Mead said. "As a rational human being, [if he is elected president] nine months from now, he'll have to do the same thing. He'll have to look carefully at the situation as it is, and make the best policy calls that he can."
SEEMS LIKE CLEARING FLIPPING TO ME..FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP..
Jim2u at 6:12PM on Jul 9th 2008