The Man Who Wasn't There
Posted July 2nd, 2008 by Da King
Barack Obama's flip-flops are coming so fast and furious these days that I think we should rename the Obama campaign Shock And Awe. It's shocking how easily Obama abandons a previously held position, and we should all be in awe of the fact that he gets away with it. Now, I'm just spitballing here, but wouldn't it be nice if we had some kind of group that would keep track of the issues and could question Obama on his endless contradictions before we make him the leader of the free world ? That would be very helpful and informative for the American voting public. We could call that group, say, the media.
Sadly, the majority of the mainstream media isn't much interested in speaking truth to power when it comes to St. Barack. They are more interested in swooning at his eloquence and patting themselves on the back for how wonderfully cosmopolitan and progressive they are. Truth has nothing to do with it. Who cares if Obama flip-flops on an issue or twenty ? That only demonstrates his "complexity". Yeah, that's the ticket.
But I'm probably just distracting you from the issues America really cares about.
The latest rollover by Obama is his stance on gay marriage. Previously, he opposed gay marriage, but said that individual states should have the right to form their own policies on the issue. Then California proposed an initiative to ban gay marriage, and….Obama OPPOSES it. So much for states rights. The gay marriage issue has become like so, so many others for Barack Obama. He opposes gay marriage, except for when he doesn't. In a letter to a San Francisco based lesbian/gay alliance group, Obama said he believes in:
“fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law…And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states”
Yet Obama still says he opposes gay marriage. Yup. Okay. Whatever. Hope and change. This is a historic election. It's the first time an invisible man will become president.
In addition to Obama opposing gay marriage (sorta), supporting the Second Amendment (sometimes), supporting the FISA bill (for now), supporting NAFTA (except when in Ohio or Michigan), and opposing the Fairness Doctrine (definitely, maybe), Barack made a speech yesterday voicing his support for the expansion of faith-based initiatives. With the continued softening of Obama's positions on Iraq, Iran, and his backpedaling on increasing the capital gains tax rate, it's starting to look like Obama is nothing but a "Bush third termer", if I may borrow a Democratic talking point (Sorry Dems, I couldn't resist taking that shot). When Bush started faith-based initiatives, the entire Left screamed "separation of church and state !" in unison. They were certain Bush was going to implement a theocratic thug state, reminiscent of the Taliban, but without the bourkas. That didn't happen, naturally, but what is the Left saying now about Barack the evangelical faith-baser ? They should be apoplectic, but so far the protests are far less than deafening. The Huffington Post mentioned Obama's faith-based speech (far down the page), but only said it "could cause controversy", and that Obama was doing it to "court the evangelical vote". No outrage from HuffPo, not that I really thought there would be. Somehow it's different when it's one of their own.
July 2nd, 2008 at 10:37 am
I think that Obama can quite fairly be described as a real fair weather friend and an outstanding tell them what they want to hear politician.
July 2nd, 2008 at 11:45 am
That is very good…Shock and Awe.
I am impressed by that. And it is so true.
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Yes so true. Almost as true as the flip flops of the former maverick, Mr. McCain.
1. McCain has said that he both supports Roe and that it should be repealed;
2. He said J. Falwell was an "agent of intolerance" but later befriended Falwell and hired Falwell's debate coach (as you remember, Falwell said Americans deserved 9/11);
3. He accused the Wyly's in TX of being corrupt businessman only to later seek their support;
4. Torture;
5. Abandoning legislation WITH HIS NAME ON IT;
6. Ethanol (for and against); Confederate flag (against and for);tax cuts; etc etc etc
I could go on but you get the point. John Sidney McCain makes John Kerry look like Abraham Lincoln. He was the best candidate in 2000 and you guys picked Mr. Bush. Now you have to live with what Mr. McCain has become. The former maverick is a shill for votes at this point.
“Americans had elected us to change government, and they rejected us because they believed government had changed us. We must spend the next two years reacquainting the public and ourselves with the reason we came to office in the first place: to serve a cause greater than our self-interest.”
-John McCain
I guess he meant unless you actually get the nomination. Mr. Obama ain't much, but he least he ain't John McCain.
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Mr. da truth,
Amen, brother. McCain's appeal was once that he had the grit, courage, and the other qualities necessary to survive as a Vietnam POW, and that he spoke his mind. That man is long gone.
July 2nd, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Obama has definitely shown himself to be better than McCain in several respects.
He's a better liar than McCain
He's a bigger racist than McCain
He's a more dedicated marxist than McCain
He doesn't have to carry around the baggage of honorable military service like McCain
He's not weighed down by a reverance for the principles and traditions that made this country great, like McCain
He doesn't have to clutter his lapel with those silly flag pins like McCain
And if elected, He'll represent all 57 states, whereas McCain would only pledge to represent 50 states
Yep, Obama ain't much, but he's got McCain beat.
July 2nd, 2008 at 8:34 pm
This issue disturbs me to no end. How difficult would it be to set up a media branch that simply weeds through the BS? If one were able to prove the lies that mesmerize the naive, the humility might have them second-guessing what lies to pull next.
I'll hear it from the leftist-radicals, but AM radio seems to be my only choice.
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:28 am
da truth,
Good post. You stole my thunder a little bit. I've been working up a list of McCain's flips to post myself. Stay tuned.
You left out McCain's reversal on offshore oil drilling.
Here's one significant difference between McCain and Obama's flip-flops. McCain's come over the course of a political career that spans two decades. Obama has equaled and surpassed McCain's flip-flops in less than ONE YEAR. Obama is a very troubling candidate once you get past the flowery rhetoric.
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:35 am
Alex,
It would be veryl simple for the media to report on these issues, but they are more interested in infotainment than imparting knowledge. I guess an ignorant public is a malleable public.
July 3rd, 2008 at 8:10 am
New campaign ad: "Our flip-flopper is better than yours."
July 3rd, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Rev, that is a great idea but ours hasn't thrown as many people under the bus as yours has. His pastor of 20 years was pitched when he got to be too big a load just as the white grandmother was pitched some time before Wright. Then he more or less said that another surrogate, Wesley Clark, hadn't been fair in what he said about McCain. Should I go on about the people littering the underside of the Obama campaign bus?
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Rev,
Well said. I think McCain should probably try that ad. Maybe the media would pay some attention to him then.
That's one reason I don't really support either candidate very much. Then the Libertarians had to go nominate 11th hour convert Bob Barr, so they're off my list too. I'm a man without a party this election cycle. Looks like Nader time ! (totally kidding).
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Oh please roy….you're wearing me out on this under the bus stuff. He did no such thing to any of those you mention.
Obama has said, FROM EARLY ON, that he would not challenge McCain on his military service, in fact, he has always prefaced any remarks about McCain by acknowledging and paying tribute to McCain's military service.
Clark, of course, was absolutely correct in what he said….and he ain't backing down. McCain's military record, especially when it's frontpaged continuously in his campaign, shouldn't be off limits from challenges. How being shot down and held prisoner for 5 years qualifies a person to become president…..is beyond me.
McCain simply is not qualified because of his judgment, it's poor.
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:39 pm
King, I look forward to your post on Mr. McCain. I admit it is troubling that Mr. Obama has flipped so quickly, but I see that as worse than Mr. McCain because Mr. McCain quickly flipped on things he had believed for years. I think it is more difficult to make such a flip than something you have only been saying for a couple of months.
The one that disturbs me the most is how can he flip on legislation that has his name on it? That troubles me to no end. You also make an excellent point about Mr. Barr….and that happened when I was seriously considering becoming an L. Oh well.
July 3rd, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Reverend how many times are you going to argue that so and so was absolutely right but Obama was also right to throw him under the bus before you get tired of it all?
July 4th, 2008 at 5:51 am
da truth,
Glad to hear you were considering the Libertarians. That is the party I have the most affinity with, though I disagree with them on a few things too (like nominating Bob Barr, what an awful choice, which I'm certain they did only because he has some name recognition. Sellouts).
Watching these politicians bob and weave to the left and the right to try to get votes just about sickens me. McCain and Obama have both done it. McCain moved to the right to get the Republican nomination (what a blunder to pick him as the nominee), and Obama was out on the left in the Democratic primaries to get the nomination, and now he's moving back to the center for the general election. Both candidates are really playing the public for fools. I don't mind if a candidate changes his mind on an issue or two, that's normal, but what's going here is quite transparent and dishonest.
July 4th, 2008 at 5:54 am
Rev,
The part where Clark said McCain's military service doesn't automatically qualify him to be president wasn't the objectionable part of Clark's comments. You are arguing the wrong point.
July 4th, 2008 at 10:04 am
King, old Rev Red just can't see that Clark held up his decisions about dropping bombs on Bosnia as something more presidential than actually squeezing the trigger or dropping the bombs. One may be more presidential than the other but I am sure that McCain's actions take more just plain guts and that is what we need to closeout the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Clark woud side with Obam about getting out as soon as possible in order to win some votes. I don't want McCain but I do see him as one who will do the right thing there and I don't see that in Obama or Clark.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Clark isn't running for office.
"just plain guts"……funny stuff….it requires "just plain guts" to walk into the pathway of a semi….however, some would see that as insanity.
"the right thing"…….I think you meant….the far-right thing.
King: What WAS the objectionable part then?
larry: I've been tired of it all for about 40 years. Even as tired of it all as I've been….I can still tell the difference between an old burnt-out cynical warmonger and a young intelligent hopeful.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:25 am
But you and millions of others cannot tell the difference between a "young intelligent hopeful" and a con man.
Do you know the difference between being objective and being gullible?
Objective people won't support Obama. They've taken an open-minded approach, and found that he just doesn't measure up to what this nation needs in a Commander-in-Chief.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:47 am
Roy,
Once Obama gets into office, I think all his campaign rhetoric about Iraq is out the window. I don't think he'll pull the troops out as he says he will. I think he'll let conditions dictate withdrawal, just like McCain would. That's what I hope for, anyway. Obama has illustrated that he will say anything to get elected. I hope he wouldn't be stupid enough to destroy the Iraq security situation just to please the anti-war crowd, not when things are progressing so well in Iraq. Pulling the rug out like that would be a treasonous act.
What I really hope is that things in Iraq go SO well, that Obama can continue pulling the troops out once he's in office without problems. That would be win-win for everyone. Obama wouldn't look like the weenie that he is, the troops could come home, and America would still get the favored outcome. America would have fulfilled it's obligation to the Iraqis, and Iraq's future would then be up to Iraq, where it belongs.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:52 am
Rev,
The part of Wes Clark's statements that were wrong was him referring to McCain as "untested and untried", and then degrading McCain's military service. The other part was the enormous hypocrisy involved in Clark saying McCain was unqualified when McCain has vastly more qualifications and experience in all areas than the candidate Clark is backing, Obama. Clark's comments were so stupid that a big hook should have come from stage left and pulled him off camera.
July 12th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
The "untested and untried" wording was meant about McCain's executive authority. And McCain's executive authority is "untested and untried".
His military bravery has been tested and tried.
His senatorial capabilities have been tested.
But as an executive, he hasn't been tested. That's simply true.
Clark, though not my favorite, said stuff that needed saying.
McCain's campaign can't expect to run blanket advertisements about equating McCain's prior military experience with presidential qualifications….without being challenged.