The Dems Have Buyers Remorse...Obama Duped Them

Search

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,963
Reaction score
102
The Ever-Malleable Mr. Obama
By Charles Krauthammer

"To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."

-- Obama spokesman Bill Burton, Oct. 24, 2007

That was then: Democratic primaries to be won, netroot lefties to be seduced. With all that (and Hillary Clinton) out of the way, Obama now says he'll vote in favor of the new FISA bill that gives the telecom companies blanket immunity for post-Sept. 11 eavesdropping.

Back then, in the yesteryear of primary season, he thoroughly trashed the North American Free Trade Agreement, pledging to force a renegotiation, take "the hammer" to Canada and Mexico and threaten unilateral abrogation.

Today the hammer is holstered. Obama calls his previous NAFTA rhetoric "overheated" and essentially endorses what one of his senior economic advisers privately told the Canadians: The anti-trade stuff was nothing more than populist posturing.

Nor is there much left of his primary season pledge to meet "without preconditions" with Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. There will be "preparations," you see, which are being spun by his aides into the functional equivalent of preconditions.

Obama's long march to the center has begun.

And why not? What's the downside? He won't lose the left, or even mainstream Democrats. They won't stay home on Nov. 4. The anti-Bush, anti-Republican sentiment is simply too strong. Election Day is their day of revenge -- for the Florida recount, for Swift-boating, for all the injuries, real and imagined, dealt out by Republicans over the past eight years.

Normally, flip-flopping presidential candidates have to worry about the press. Not Obama. After all, this is a press corps that heard his grandiloquent Philadelphia speech -- designed to rationalize why "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can disown my white grandmother" -- then wiped away a tear and hailed him as the second coming of Abraham Lincoln. Three months later, with Wright disowned, grandma embraced and the great "race speech" now inoperative, not a word of reconsideration is heard from his media acolytes.

Worry about the press? His FISA flip-flop elicited a few grumbles from lefty bloggers, but hardly a murmur from the mainstream press. Remember his pledge to stick to public financing? Now flush with cash, he is the first general-election candidate since Watergate to opt out. Some goo-goo clean-government types chided him, but the mainstream editorialists who for years had been railing against private financing as hopelessly corrupt and corrupting evinced only the mildest of disappointment.

Indeed, the New York Times expressed a sympathetic understanding of Obama's about-face by buying his preposterous claim that it was a preemptive attack on McCain's 527 independent expenditure groups -- notwithstanding the fact that (a) as Politico's Jonathan Martin notes, "there are no serious anti-Obama 527s in existence nor are there any immediate plans to create such a group" and (b) the only independent ad of any consequence now running in the entire country is an AFSCME-MoveOn.org co-production savaging McCain.

True, Obama's U-turn on public financing was not done for ideological reasons, it was done for Willie Sutton reasons: That's where the money is. It nonetheless betrayed a principle that so many in the press claimed to hold dear.

As public financing is not a principle dear to me, I am hardly dismayed by Obama's abandonment of it. Nor am I disappointed in the least by his other calculated and cynical repositionings. I have never had any illusions about Obama. I merely note with amazement that his media swooners seem to accept his every policy reversal with an equanimity unseen since the Daily Worker would change the party line overnight -- switching sides in World War II, for example -- whenever the wind from Moscow changed direction.

The truth about Obama is uncomplicated. He is just a politician (though of unusual skill and ambition). The man who dared say it plainly is the man who knows Obama all too well. "He does what politicians do," explained Jeremiah Wright.

When it's time to throw campaign finance reform, telecom accountability, NAFTA renegotiation or Jeremiah Wright overboard, Obama is not sentimental. He does not hesitate. He tosses lustily.

Why, the man even tossed his own grandmother overboard back in Philadelphia -- only to haul her back on deck now that her services are needed. Yesterday, granny was the moral equivalent of the raving Reverend Wright. Today, she is a featured prop in Obama's fuzzy-wuzzy get-to-know-me national TV ad.

Not a flinch. Not a flicker. Not a hint of shame. By the time he's finished, Obama will have made the Clintons look scrupulous.
letters@charleskrauthammer.com
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Reaction score
2
Presidential candidates always move toward the center. Nothing new here.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
22,231
Reaction score
0
Speaking of being duped:

[SIZE=-1]By Terry M. Neal
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 18, 2005; 8:04 AM[/SIZE]

<nitf></nitf>
During the year and a half that I covered George W. Bush's 2000 presidential campaign, I must have heard his stump speech a thousand times. The lines changed little over the months, and the ending almost never changed -- Bush would raise his hand, as if taking an oath, and promise to restore honor and dignity to the White House


January 28, 2004


BOSTON—Addressing guests at a $2,000-a-plate fundraiser, George W. Bush pledged Monday that, if re-elected in November, he and running mate Dick Cheney will "restore honor and dignity to the White House."
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
89,690
Reaction score
4,116
I'm still waiting for the 2006 promises to kick in.

Is W a lame duck yet?
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
22,231
Reaction score
0
Speaking of Promises:

Mr. Bush was critical of Al Gore in the 2000 campaign for being part of “the administration that's been in charge” while the “price of gasoline has gone steadily upward.” In December 1999, in the first Republican primary debate, Mr. Bush said President Clinton “must jawbone OPEC members to lower prices.”

==========================
In October 2000, presidential candidate George W. Bush famously derided the concept of nation building and the suggestion that the U.S. military should take the lead in building up failed states.

The Washington Times An Iraqi worker places bricks for a wall surrounding a gas station in Baghdad in 2004. The U.S. State Department's new Office of Reconstruction and Stabilization is recruiting a group of civilian specialists to deploy to failed states in a crisis in as little as 48 hours.



<!-- /inline-photo --> "Maybe I'm missing something here," Mr. Bush said in a debate with Democratic rival Al Gore. "I mean, are we going to have some kind of nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not."
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,963
Reaction score
102
Presidential candidates always move toward the center. Nothing new here.

There are a lot of whisperings in the moveon.org crowd that they have the wrong guy.

FISA promises....:howdy:
 

RX Senior
Joined
Apr 20, 2002
Messages
47,431
Reaction score
2
January 28, 2004


BOSTON—Addressing guests at a $2,000-a-plate fundraiser, George W. Bush pledged Monday that, if re-elected in November, he and running mate Dick Cheney will "restore honor and dignity to the White House."
what a bizarre quote to make considering they had already been there for 4 years
 

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Messages
535
Reaction score
0
More moving to the center from Mr. Hope and Change:




On Thursday, he seemed to embrace a Supreme Court decision, written by the court’s premiere conservative and upheld 5-to-4, striking down Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns.
Mr. Obama seemed to voice support for the ban as recently as February. On Thursday, however, he issued a Delphic news release that seemed to support the Supreme Court, although staff members later insisted that might not be the case.
“I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures,” Mr. Obama said. “The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view.”
He added, “Today’s decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.”
In the last week, Mr. Obama has taken calibrated positions on issues that include electronic surveillance, campaign finance and the death penalty for child rapists, suggesting a presidential candidate in hot pursuit of what Bill Clinton once lovingly described as “the vital center.”
“A presidential candidate’s great desire is to be seen as pragmatic, and they hope their maneuvering and shifting will be seen in pursuit of some higher purpose,” said Robert Dallek, the presidential historian. “It doesn’t mean they are utterly insincere.”
George W. Bush, too, maneuvered toward the political center in 2000 presidential campaign, convincing many that he might rule in the moderately conservative tradition of his father. And Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, shifted several positions in the Republican primary, taking conservative lines on taxes and immigration.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, for generations a liberal Democratic lode star, was no easier to define. He slipped and slid his way through the 1932 election. “Herbert Hoover called him a ‘chameleon on plaid,’ ” Mr. Dallek said.
Mr. Obama has executed several policy pirouettes in recent weeks, each time landing more toward the center of the political ring. On Wednesday in Chicago, he confirmed that he would not fight a revised law that would extend retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped the government spy on American citizens. (He had previously spoken against immunity provisions in an earlier version of the bill.) And recently he backed away from his own earlier support for campaign finance spending limits in the 2008 election.
Mr. Obama describes his new turns as consistent with long-held beliefs. On Wednesday he painted his decision to opt out of the campaign finance system as a reformist gesture, noting that most of his donors are not wealthy. “Our donor base is the American people,” he said, adding that this was the thematic goal of campaign finance reform.
This most observant of politicians has throughout his career shown an appreciation for the virtues of political ambiguity. In February, a local television anchor asked Mr. Obama to explain his support of the Washington gun ban. The candidate, a transcript shows, did not object to that characterization of his position, even as he said he favored the Second Amendment and supports law-abiding people who use guns for sport and protection. “And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets, we are going to trace more effectively how these guns are ending up on the streets, to unscrupulous gun dealers, who often times are selling to straw purchasers,” he said.
In South Carolina this year, Mr. Obama lent his voice to the battle against the Bush administration’s program of wiretaps without warrants. “This administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security he demands,” he said in South Carolina earlier this year.
The bill since has been modified, with internal safeguards put in place on wiretaps without warrants. This has not pleased Mr. Obama’s Democratic allies on the Hill; Senators Charles E. Schumer of New York, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, and Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, strongly oppose the bill.
But Mr. Obama indicated on Wednesday he probably would vote for it. “The issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security of the American people,” he said.
On the death penalty, Mr. Obama wrote in his memoir, “The Audacity of Hope,” (Crown, 2007), that the penalty “does little to deter crime.” But he added that society has the right to express outrage at heinous crimes. During his 2004 Senate campaign, he publicly supported the death penalty, even as he called the justice system flawed and urged a moratorium on executions.
Mr. Obama is an introspective candidate, and perhaps the best analyst of his own political style. “I serve as a blank screen,” he wrote in “The Audacity of Hope,” “on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
<NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM></NYT_UPDATE_BOTTOM></NYT_TEXT>More Articles in US »
 

Timetoplay (by the rules)
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
0
There are a lot of whisperings in the moveon.org crowd that they have the wrong guy.

FISA promises....:howdy:

I HIGHLY doubt he will lose the moveon.org vote
 

I'll be in the Bar..With my head on the Bar
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
9,980
Reaction score
3
I dont know why they would feel duped..
He says in his book that HE is a BLANK SCREEN and that anyone who looks at it will see whatever they want to see.
He started his campaign with at least 3 BOLD FACE LIES .
Its not his fault really he cant help that he's too stupid to have any real opinons on anything or that his supporters are 2 stupid to see it.....
 

New member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
9,491
Reaction score
1
There are a lot of whisperings in the moveon.org crowd that they have the wrong guy.

FISA promises....:howdy:

You in the know over there or is this another falsehood?
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,963
Reaction score
102
You in the know over there or is this another falsehood?

Just what I'm hearing.

What falsehoods?

Got link?

Or just another cheap shot without evidence?
 

Timetoplay (by the rules)
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
0
Just what I'm hearing.

What falsehoods?

Got link?

Or just another cheap shot without evidence?

To be fair, the burden of proof is on you, since you were the one who brought it up.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,963
Reaction score
102
To be fair, the burden of proof is on you, since you were the one who brought it up.

You guys are too funny...to be fair...everybody complains about cut and paste...

then when you don't....what do they do? Complain.

STFU
 

Timetoplay (by the rules)
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
0
You guys are too funny...to be fair...everybody complains about cut and paste...

then when you don't....what do they do? Complain.

STFU

You're all insane. Every last one of you on all sides, "left" and "right."
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
22,231
Reaction score
0
MR MJ:

you can handle the assigment ....

Hell ... if not for your "undercover reporting skills" Geraldo would have
never found Capone's vault
 

Timetoplay (by the rules)
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
0
MR MJ:

you can handle the assigment ....

Hell ... if not for your "undercover reporting skills" Geraldo would have
never found Capone's vault

Hey, Nancy Drew, mind your own business. I gave you your own assignment 9 hours ago and you have yet to produce.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,963
Reaction score
102
Here you go...lazy google deficient left wing loons.

Just one of many comments in the blogosphere...

Republicans Taunt Obama As Spineless Over FISA Reversal
stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

Posted June 26, 2008 | 04:03 PM (EST)

In a press conference call this morning, John McCain surrogate Sam Brownback (R-KS) pointed at Barack Obama and essentially called him a spineless panderer -- and welcomed it, saying he expected Obama to cave in on Iraq withdrawal next. McCain senior policy adviser Randy Scheunemann, with tremendous self-assurance, described Obama's support for the FISA bill -- a bill McCain also supports! -- as an example of Obama's supreme commitment to his own "political fortunes" above all else. And then, to underscore how weak they now consider Obama to be, the McCain campaign then issued an "In Case You Missed It" press release with a transcript highlighting these statements.

In other words: it's not just MoveOn.org and others on the left who are questioning Obama's principles over the FISA flap; even his opponents are pointing the finger and laughing at him for being such a panderer and accommodationist. And Obama hasn't even voted on the bill yet!

Brownback said Obama's spinelessness on the D.C. gun ban, campaign funding, and, most importantly, on FISA, meant he probably would eventually cave in on Iraq. Brownback even "set down a marker" -- dared Obama -- to concede on Iraq just like he's said he'll do on FISA
. It's a remarkable display of chutzpah on Brownback's part:


Proving that this wasn't just Brownback shooting off his mouth, Scheunemann piled on, making the exact same points, even down to his expectation that Obama would "flip" on Iraq, using even harsher terms:

http://www.rhythmism.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69811
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,140,500
Messages
13,907,075
Members
104,710
Latest member
slotonline199
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com