The Campaign of Flip-Flop
Jul 7th, 2008 by Christian Hudson
In yet another big flip-flop, Obama recently told the Military Times he has decided he actually would listen to the military commanders on the ground in Iraq, and not just pull out of Iraq immediately.
This is huge.
The central pillar of Obama’s platform has always been his pledge to immediately withdraw troops from Iraq. In fact, Obama has openly criticized candidates that said they would listen to the military commanders and decide what to do based on the situation, rather than making rash decisions inside a vacuum.
For Obama to come out now and basically say “Well… it depends…” instead of ordering “an immediate withdraw,” as he has consistently pledged to do, is a huge flip-flop.
Here’s the Republican’s response:
Obama Claims His Iraq Plan Always Depended On Conditions On The Ground, But Previously Said Troops Would Be Out In 16 Months
MYTH: On Thursday, Obama Claimed That He Has Always Said His Timetable For Withdrawal From Iraq Would Be Based On Conditions On The Ground:
Obama: “I’ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed…And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.” (Jeff Zeleny, “Obama: Open to ‘Refine’ Iraq Withdrawal Timeline,” The New York Times’ “The Caucus” Blog, www.nytimes.com, 7/3/08)
Obama Claims That He “Always Said” He Would Slow The Pace Of Withdrawal From Iraq Based On Conditions On The Ground. Obama: “And as I’ve said before, and this was true during the heat of the primary, it was true when we posted this Web site. I have always said, and again, you can take a look at the language, that as commander-in-chief, I would always reserve the right to do what’s best in America’s national interests. And if it turned out, for example, that, you know, we had to, in certain months, slow the pace because of the safety of American troops in terms of getting combat troops out, of course we would take that into account. I would be a poor commander-in-chief if I didn’t take facts on the ground into account.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, 7/3/08)
- Obama: “I’ve given no indication of a change in policy. I haven’t suggested that we’re moving in a different direction.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, 7/3/08)
FACT: Obama Previously Said He Would Immediately Begin Withdrawing Troops From Iraq And Would Have Them Out In 16 Months:
In May 2008, Obama Promised To End The War In 2009. Obama: “When I promise that we are going to bring this war in Iraq to a close in 2009, I want the American people to understand that I opposed this war in 2002, 2003, ‘04, ‘05, ‘06 and ‘07, so you can have confidence that I will be serious about ending this war.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The North Carolina Democrat Party 2008 Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, Raleigh, NC, 5/2/08)
blockquote>
(Source: Republican National Committee, http://www.gop.com/NEWS/NewsRead.aspx?Guid=68b9c834-a4e8-4c05-9f1b-b6a92dae5bb4)
My apologies on the bad formatting, the HTML tags and I are in disagreement.
“In yet another big flip-flop, Obama recently told the Military Times he has decided he actually would listen to the military commanders on the ground in Iraq, and not just pull out of Iraq immediately”
The Iraqi government has indicated that their desire is to renew the security agreement with the United States due to expire at the end of this year if the United States agrees to a timetable to pull the troops out. President Bush does favor the agreement and does not want to set a timetable.
So what’s up with Bush flip-flopping about let Iraq handle their own security after Iraq is a free country!
“The central pillar of Obama’s platform has always been his pledge to immediately withdraw troops from Iraq”
Yea and Bush’s platform was to fight to free Iraq and freedom for the Iraqis. Now Bush refuses to let the Iraqi government set the timetable for the U.S. Troops to leaves.
If Bush wants to fight the terrorist head on he should move on to Pakistani and shock and awl their asses!
If the republicans sit on their hands through this campaign, Barack’s savvy, if hollow, dash to the center, on Iraq, guns, and other centrist issues, might actually work. If McCain’s campaign doesn’t start defining the freshman Senator soon, his hologram image as a Compassionate Conservative will have become set, permanently, in the minds of swing voters.
.
Thus, a few days before he wins the Presidency in November, he’ll have been permitted to earn himself the prize he really deserves: Best Halloween Costume.
I would to God that Senator Obama had changed his mind due to the change in facts in Iraq. Sadly, I see nothing in his statement that makes me think he changed one bit. It is the same old lack of strategy. The only difference is that he is showing the sanity of abandoning the reckless rhetoric of being hell bent to get out in 16 months regardless of the advise of the military. He is not saying we will not pull out. He is just saying that he won’t do it blindly. He is Hillary. She should be complaining to the super delegates.
We need to pull back in Iraq in accordance to facts on the ground. We may need a small long term presence as an insurance policy.
I might actually feel sorry for all of the people that supported Obama in the primaries, that is, if they have the decency to admit that he is a phony. He is even worse than the empty suit that I once saw him as; he is just like Hillary…willing to say or do anything to get elected.
Watching the democrat primary debates, their discussions of Iraq always brought me to shouting at the t.v. (sorry to my neighbors). Both Obama and Hillary promised to bring the “troops” home immediately NO MATTER WHAT, which is so profoundly idiotic given the way things were shaping up, even back then. At least Obama, the snake that he is, was “smart” enough to qualify his promise by saying that he would bring the “combat troops” home immediately on a set schedule.
Of course, the debate moderators were too busy making some fresh cocoa and fluffing pillows for Obama to follow up with a simple question of: Exactly what are you talking about when you say “combat troops”? But why would I have expected them to ask the young senator any questions that he might have to definitively answer.
I’m beginning to realize that Hillary did the republicans a huge favor by bringing out all the Rev. Wright, Weathermen, etc.
Obama’s supporters stood behind him and this would have been a failing tactic for R’s. Now, however, Obama is simply falling to pieces and the Rev. Wright stuff will always linger.
Now if only the media would do their damn job and report objectively, we might have an honest election where people are held to their words.
Christian I’m sure you’re not awaiting my approval with baited breath, but this was a much more substantive post than your previous post about Obama’s cousin’s car salesman saying he is a Mooslim. Keep it up.
Christian, you are mighty loose with your words, to the point of falsification. He never said he would remove our troops “immediately”!!! You need to get your facts straight, and quit your Limbaugh-like propagandizing, if you wish to be credible.
Obama’s position has consistently been that he will remove combat troops, two brigades per month, over a 16 month period. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats, and be prepared to do targeted strikes on al-Qaeda if they attempt to build a base there. He has recently stated that he would consult with our field commanders — is this not what you would expect a President to do? So that is nothing new either. He would also launch an intense diplomatic initiative, and commit to live up to our humanitarian debt owed to the Iraqi people.
So David is exactly right, Christian, when he says that “Obama has not change one bit.”
On FISA, Obama’s position is that the law must be obeyed, contrary to Cheney/Bush, although he is willing not to prosecute the telecoms for obeying the orders of Bush. So get it straight, it is Cheney/Bush who are the principle law-breakers here.
On guns, Obama supports the 2nd Amendment, but feels there should be some restrictions regarding safety features and weapon types. I am unaware of the details on the latter part of his position.
I find it quite telling that when you find yourselves in agreement with some of Obama’s positions, you totally freak out. In other words, you folks can’t stand centrist positions, because you know very well, as adroitly stated by Al, that all he can then think to say is that he [Obama] is wearing a “Halloween Costume”. You wish!
Shall we now talk about the real flipflopper, Senator John McCain? Or do you want a pass on that subject?
Although I think local professor of law and occasional News Journal contributor Robert Lipkin is as crazy as a bag of squirrels and consistently wrong on key issues, at least he has the integrity to start to question the Obama phenomenon:
http://www.essentiallycontestedamerica.org/
Aww, c’mon, Perry, ya gotta admit to at least some of the remarkably metamorphic policy differences between Obama the Candidate and Obama the (Presumptive) Nominee. He’s slip-sliding right through the pre-Watergate Nixon, perhaps even past his recently channeled idol Reagan (who, personally, favored gun control), and, gaw-lee, seems fixin’ on settlin’ down just a hair to the left of Hannibal. Why, shucks, son, if he can just manage to keep Sharpton and Jackson in their closets until the election, he might even lock up the “nuke-those-bastards” beer-swilling rednecks’ votes. Why, I wouldn’t be surprised to see good ol’ Barry Obama pulling up on a Harley at the Sturgis, SD biker rally next month!
.
(On second thought, I would be surprised, because Sturgis is too soon, even for Barack, and this early in his shape-shifting, he’d need a double order of Secret Service to go. Still, the mental image of a motorcycle-helmetted Obama brings up fond memories of Michael Dukakis the Mighty Army Tank Driver, who, at this point in his campaign, was up about fifteen points on W’s Dad in the polls. Another liberal brought down largely by his own transparent metamorphosis… but I digress.)
.
There’s a difference between the oscillations of McCain and Obama: John’s flip-flopping to try to retain the GOP’s core support, of which he’s all but assured, while Barack’s flip-flopping to try to claim the swing votes that he never quite had, which is a much tougher job.
.
To win in the center, Barack Obama feels he needs to show that he’s a hard-nosed tough guy with the practical sense to judge a situation on the issues, rather than the knee-jerk leftist ideologue figure he’s cut for himself during his brief term in national office (during which he’s spent most of his time gathering a base of support and getting ready to run for President).
.
While there’s nothing wrong with a little “flip-flopping,” there’s definitely something wrong with bait-and-switch advertising. Not having heard much from the McCain campaign lately, I can imagine they’re hard at work preparing a gallery of embarrasing Before and After pictures for the Fall campaign.
.
If you don’t think the bright young man from Illinois is vulnerable on that score, then you, my friend, have another think coming. This election remains McCain’s to lose. The good news for your side is that its looking like McCain might actually have his heart set on exactly that.
You guys are SO frustrated you can no longer attack the “immediate rash withdrawal” straw man you created, which was never true. It’s going to take a while to put Bush’s toothpaste back into the tube, and it won’t be easy. Nobody ever said different.
Smart wording and a noble attempt at changing the subject, Noman. Conservative politicians (both democrats and republicans) have been trying to put Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” Federal giveaway toothpaste back in its tube for more than forty years now, so cleaning up after your predecessors is certainly nothing new at the White House.
.
But, to spin so quickly, after you’ve just barely defeated the great Hillary Clinton — and largely on the basis of leftist issues like your promise to end the war that, unlike her, you vigorously opposed from the beginning — well, that’s nothing less than stunning, if you’re a supporter.
.
And if you’re not a supporter, well, the phrase “flip-flop” just doesn’t go far enough to describe it. Politics is a truly strange universe, but, in the physical world, anyone who’d turn around that quickly would need to be fitted with a neck brace.
.
Ending the war means ending it, and anything less isn’t ending it. Obama’s a smart guy and a quick study, but how could he possibly have learned so much in two weeks, without recently visiting the theater of battle, to claim that informed wisdom and moral courage, and not mere political expediency, are behind his waffling on this central campaign position? Not to mention his remarkably elastic positions on pesky things like guns.
.
Look, I can be as cynical as the next guy, and I can certainly understand the urge for a politician to sidle up next to an undecided voter.
.
But, really, think for a minute about Obama’s political agenda when he echoes Bill Cosby on the social responsibility of deadbeat dads, when he extols the values inherent in the Second Amendment, when he hides that funky-looking Seal of the Great Barack Obama that he used to hang on his podium — you know, the one that mocked the presidential seal. You mean to tell me you don’t see this as a looming problem for his campaign?
.
Still, take heart. While it’s still early, and Obama should be ahead by about twice the margin he currently enjoys, I see no signs that McCain’s campaign has a clue about what to do to win in November.
.
Al, I enjoy reading your observations, first your attempt at fairness, second your humor. Jolly good!
There is no doubt that Obama is trying to broaden his appeal; however, what you miss, he is doing it in a nuanced way, such as to attract more independents, Reagan Dems, and moderate Repubs, knowing that all the yelling from the left wing Dems will not change how they vote in November.
So he has not changed his basic positions, rather he has slightly extending his positions, like on the 2nd Amendment, like on expanding faith based initiatives, like on withdrawing our troops from this endless Iraq War with consultation with the field commanders, like on his emphasis on Afghanistan and on getting Osama bin Laden. And don’t forget diplomatic initiatives to solve problems, an approach that Bush himself is invoking, finally, with some success!!!
Moreover, on energy and the economy, Obama’s idea is to make those who can afford to do so to pay back to the nation, for a change, with his tax policy favoring the middle, and his energy policy favoring massive investment in alternate, non-fossil fuel energy sources and technology. If anyone has a better idea on these issues, I have not seen it yet!
This is driving people like Christian and Rush up the proverbial wall.
And you are correct, Al, McCain hasn’t a clue, as he continues to remain close to Bush’s 20% base, and to propose gimmicks re the energy and economy issue. In my view, this is nowhere near a winning strategy, nor is it aimed at the serious concerns of the average American.
McCain’s energy strategy is the one which makes sense to most people.
Perry, you do have to admit that it is a major change on the Surveillance and the public financing thing is just embarrassing.
Look we can discuss whether these so called moves to the center are “flip flops ” , or truly a broadning of a candidates positions. But the only question that need be asked is , are they truly a change of policy or a campaign shell game?
Can we trust the Senator to stick to the center if elected? Or will he rush back to the left where he came from? And while we are at it maybe we should ask the same question about Sen. Obama.
Both candidates are making moves to the right after long histories of being center left. It is going to be hard for conservatives to flip the coin and decide which one stinks the least.
Which one can we believe? Well Sen. McCain has always been Sen. McCain, we know what we are getting with him. But Sen. Obama is continually remaking himself to coincide with the hot issue of the day, or the political need of the moment.
Do we want a leader who has always worn his liberal lean on his sleeve, or one who seems to be comfortable changing positions in mid sentance. This act didn’t work on the American voters in the last election and I don’t believe it will work with the thinking voters this time either.
I am no fan of Sen. Mc Cain , as I have made clear on this site many times, but if I have to ask myself , which candidate I trust to be who they portray themselves to be it would have to be Sen. Mc Cain.
Sen. Obama is the result of slick marketing , he is an empty vessel ,and who is filling him may be the scarriest question of all.
We are not hiring a model to promote our new line of evening wear. We are electing the next leader of the free world.
Obama supporters need to ask themselves , are they voting for Obama because he is the best candidate or are they voting against Pres. Bush.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/voters_perceive_obama_moving_to_the_middle
The Obama two step may be working with some, but I don’t buy it.
(Thanks, Perry. Fun punditing around over here, nice meeting and hanging with you guys. By the way, FYI, Attempted Fairness is a Class C Felony in New York and can land you three to five. I plead No Contest.)
.
David, you and I both ain’t buyin’ it, no way. But, then again, we’re not the target market.
.
Barack’s articulate and canny, and, being lean on public history and with not much in the way of a record to paste him with, he’s in a great position to fill in his own blank slate. He’s taking great advantage of it, too, as hardly a day goes by that he doesn’t make a headline by copping some juicy conservative position for himself.
.
McCain’s campaign needs to break out the crayons and start coloring in the blanks themselves, ’cause the Obama self-portrait’s looking a whole lot like a young Abraham Lincoln.
.
“McCain’s campaign needs to break out the crayons and start coloring in the blanks themselves…”
Well, let’s start with this gem: Senator Obama’s crowning jewel of legislation, the Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433 & H.R.1302) which “requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive policy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and coordination with the international community, businesses and NGOs.”
Apparently Obama thinks that LBJ’s Great Society was such a stunning success that he wants to repeat the performance on a global scale. I call it the Global War on Poverty. Couple that with his “most liberal in the Senate” voting record (a considerable feat given that he had to out-liberal an actual Socialist, Bernie Sanders, to achieve that distinction) and you have a pretty good box of crayons to work with.
David said: “Perry, you do have to admit that it is a major change on the Surveillance and the public financing thing is just embarrassing.”
No, David, I don’t see it that way at all. To not prosecute the telecoms who obeyed a Presidential Order — I find that reasonable, certainly not a major change. What is it that bothers you with that position? Furthermore, the fault really lies with Bush for issuing an illegal order, so he should be prosecuted!!!
On the public financing, I will grant you, that is a major change. However, I go along with it, because like the 200r campaign, the GOP supporters are going to launch a massive “swift boat” negative, demonizing initiative against Obama, some say amounting to around $250 million. What would you do if you were Obama, David? Besides, are you also willing to come down on McCain for illegally using the upcoming public financing as collateral to bolster his primary campaign. That was illegal!!! What Obama did was not!
GRex said: “Apparently Obama thinks that LBJ’s Great Society was such a stunning success that he wants to repeat the performance on a global scale.”
Well yes, GRex, it was indeed a stunning success, with some serious problems also, to be sure. I suspect you are too young to know, nor have you read much about it. Ever here of:
The Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Voting Rights Act of 1965
The Civil Rights Act of 1968
The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 and the OEO
The Job Corps (training for jobs)
The Neighborhood Youth Corps (summer jobs for poor)
Domestic Peace Corps (VISTA)
Model Cities Program
Upward Bound
Head Start
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
Higher Education Act of 1965
National Teacher Corps
Social Security Act of 1965 (Medicare)
Title XIX of the Social Security Act of 1965 (Medicaid)
National Endowment of the Arts and Humanities
National Public Broadcasting: CPB, PBS and NPR
Truth in Lending Act
Numerous Acts to protect air and water quality, etc re the environment.
Pretty impressive, yes GRex? Too bad about the Vietnam War and the neoconservative onslaught that cut short many of these programs. Regardless, many persist to this day, 40 some years after, surviving the neoconservative onslaught led by Irving Kristol and cuts implemented by RR and W.
We need to get to an updated version of the War on Poverty, especially in these hard times that W has carved out for all but the upper income elites who with few exceptions give next to nothing back.
Don’t you think Obama has the right idea, per the policy quote you supplied? What are your objections, GRex?
On second thought, I should have titled this “The Audacity of Flip-Flop” instead of the campaign.
Hey, the whole point of the civil suits against the telecoms was to get them to rat out Bush’s Fourth Amendment violations. But now that’s moot, because the FISA bill as amended requires the telecoms to hand over proof of a Presidential order to save their own asses.
That means Obama will land in the White House amid a barrel full of smoking guns pointing to Bush. What more could an honest US Attorney General ask for? Patrick Fitzgerald anybody? John Edwards?
The new BHO doctrine - when the going gets tough we leave, but if the going gets easy we stay. I would think that since the surge is indeed working this would comport well well BHO’s original position of immediately pulling out of Iraq - our presence is not needed. Now he is hesitant to leave Iraq. I am missing something.
[…] So if you decry a flip flop here, or a flip flop there, I may comment as to its irrelevance….. but more than likely I will keep it private and wonder to myself as to how it could be possible, that on this planet you share with the rest of us, you became so petty….. muttering under my breath…. “‘what the hell wrong with them,….Are they f—ing nuts?” Blogroll […]
Noman, there is a flaw in your strategy, the actions where not illegal. Will a national security letter (authorized by law) due? President Bush did something good and you can’t stand it.
The constant struggle is that government likes to keep going.
the actions where not illegal.
What actions? They tell you this is about “wiretaps.” But that is a misnomer. If this were only about listening to specific calls from suspected individuals, nobody would have any problem with that. That remains perfectly legal with a warrant.
But this is not about wiretaps. This is about hoovering up all communications foreign and domestic - web browsing, email, phones, cell phones, and building a dossier on every American. If you approve of that, then you have lost your right to speak of “liberty” as if it were important to you.
We will see if it is illegal or not, once we have our day in court.
Will a national security letter (authorized by law) due?
Yes please! Each one is a confession. Now we need to get the perps under hot lights and get them to tell where the rest of the bodies are buried.
” Now we need to get the perps under hot lights and get them to tell where the rest of the bodies are buried.”
Better watch that… the liberals will consider those tactics torture before too long.
[…] being elected, as he has consistently promised, although recently he has backpedaled on that (Link: The Campaign of Flip-Flop ), the United States will not be in any better position financially. Obama is going to maintain the […]